Re: bogus: logical replication rows/cols combinations

On 2022-Apr-30, Amit Kapila wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 2:02 AM Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> > That seems to deal with a circular replication, i.e. two logical
> > replication links - a bit like a multi-master. Not sure how is that
> > related to the issue we're discussing here?
> 
> It is not directly related to what we are discussing here but I was
> trying to emphasize the point that users need to define the logical
> replication via pub/sub sanely otherwise they might see some weird
> behaviors like that.

I agree with that.

My proposal is that if users want to define multiple publications, and
their definitions conflict in a way that would behave ridiculously (==
bound to cause data inconsistencies eventually), an error should be
thrown.  Maybe we will not be able to catch all bogus cases, but we can
be prepared for the most obvious ones, and patch later when we find
others.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"En las profundidades de nuestro inconsciente hay una obsesiva necesidad
de un universo lógico y coherente. Pero el universo real se halla siempre
un paso más allá de la lógica" (Irulan)