Horton

Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

amit <amitlangote09@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
To: Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-11-08T05:31:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Fix RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE issue

  2. Allow publishing partition changes via ancestors

  3. Add logical replication support to replicate into partitioned tables

  4. Refactor code to look up local replication tuple

  5. Some refactoring of logical/worker.c

  6. Prepare to support non-tables in publications

  7. Support adding partitioned tables to publication

Hello Rafia,

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:41 AM Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 at 08:06, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for sharing this case.  I hadn't considered it, but you're
>> right that it should be handled sensibly.  I have fixed table sync
>> code to handle this case properly.  Could you please check your case
>> with the attached updated patch?
>>
> I was checking this today and found that the behavior doesn't change much with the updated patch. The tables are still replicated, just that a select count from parent table shows 0, rest of the partitions including default one has the data from the publisher. I was expecting more like an error at subscriber saying the table type is not same.
>
> Please find the attached file for the test case, in case something is unclear.

Thanks for the test case.

With the latest patch I posted, you'll get the following error on subscriber:

create subscription mysub connection 'host=localhost port=5432
dbname=postgres' publication mypub;
ERROR:  cannot use relation "public.t" as logical replication target
DETAIL:  "public.t" is a regular table on subscription side whereas a
partitioned table on publication side

Although to be honest, I'd rather not see the error.  As I mentioned
in my email earlier, it'd be nice to be able sync a partitioned table
and a regular table (or vice versa) via replication.

Thanks,
Amit