Horton

Re: Confused comment about drop replica identity index

Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Euler Taveira" <euler@eulerto.com>
To: "Michael Paquier" <michael@paquier.xyz>, "wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com" <wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Ashutosh Bapat" <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-12-20T14:57:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021, at 8:11 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 03:46:13AM +0000, wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > Here is a patch to correct wrong comment about
> > REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX, And improve the pg-doc.
> 
> That's mostly fine.  I have made some adjustments as per the
> attached.
Your patch looks good to me.

> Pondering more about this thread, I don't think we should change the
> existing behavior in the back-branches, but I don't have any arguments
> about doing such changes on HEAD to help the features being worked
> on, either.  So I'd like to apply and back-patch the attached, as a
> first step, to fix the inconsistency.
> 
What do you think about the attached patch? It forbids the DROP INDEX. We might
add a detail message but I didn't in this patch.


--
Euler Taveira
EDB   https://www.enterprisedb.com/

Commits

  1. Correct comment and some documentation about REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX

  2. Add regression tests for REPLICA IDENTITY with dropped indexes