Re: Virtual generated columns
vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Expand virtual generated columns for ALTER COLUMN TYPE
- 5069fef1cfae 18.0 landed
-
Eliminate code duplication in replace_rte_variables callbacks
- 363a6e8c6fcf 18.0 landed
-
Expand virtual generated columns in the planner
- 1e4351af329f 18.0 landed
-
Virtual generated columns
- 83ea6c54025b 18.0 landed
-
Additional tests for stored generated columns
- 41084409f635 18.0 landed
-
Improve generated_stored test
- 44b61efb7928 18.0 landed
- 86749ea3b766 18.0 landed
-
Fix handling of CREATE DOMAIN with GENERATED constraint syntax
- 84a67725cd11 18.0 landed
-
Add pg_constraint rows for not-null constraints
- 14e87ffa5c54 18.0 cited
-
Put generated_stored test objects in a schema
- 894be11adfa6 18.0 landed
-
Rename regress test generated to generated_stored
- b9ed4969250d 18.0 landed
-
Small code simplification
- 7ff9afbbd1df 18.0 landed
-
Remove useless code
- e26d313bad92 18.0 landed
-
Remove useless initializations
- da2aeba8f533 18.0 landed
-
doc: Clarify that pg_attrdef also stores generation expressions
- da486d360103 18.0 landed
-
Clean out column-level pg_init_privs entries when dropping tables.
- 76618097a6c0 17.0 cited
-
Re-implement the ereport() macro using __VA_ARGS__.
- e3a87b4991cc 13.0 cited
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 01:16, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote: > > On 15.01.25 08:11, vignesh C wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 19:08, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote: > >> > >> > >> I've also added a patch that addresses logical replication. It > >> basically adds back some of the prohibitions against including generated > >> columns in publications that have been lifted, but this time only for > >> virtual generated columns, and amends the documentation. It doesn't > >> rename the publication option "publish_generated_columns", but maybe > >> that should be done. > > > > There are two potential approaches we could take to address the > > "publish_generated_columns" option: a) We could support multiple > > values for publish_generated_columns, such as 'none', 'stored', and > > 'virtual', as Amit suggested in [1]. b) Alternatively, we could rename > > publish_generated_columns to publish_stored_generated_columns. > > Both options seem reasonable to me. Do you have a preference for which > > approach would be better? > > I have a very weak preference for a). Thanks for the suggestion, I have posted a patch for this at [1]. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm3OcXdY0EzDEKAfaK9gq2B67Mfsgxu93%2B_249ohyts%3D0g%40mail.gmail.com Regards, Vignesh