Logical replication restriction documentation

From: PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: software(dot)mike(dot)johnson(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Logical replication restriction documentation
Date: 2019-09-25 14:43:19
Message-ID: 156942259967.1110.17296757626302026770@wrigleys.postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/logical-replication-restrictions.html
Description:

Re this note in the "logical replication restrictions" documentation page:
Replication is only possible from base tables to base tables. That is, the
tables on the publication and on the subscription side must be normal
tables, not views, materialized views, partition root tables, or foreign
tables. In the case of partitions, you can therefore replicate a partition
hierarchy one-to-one, but you cannot currently replicate to a differently
partitioned setup. Attempts to replicate tables other than base tables will
result in an error.

We are exploring using logical replication and partitioned tables, and
therefore I am trying to understand if these two concepts will work
together. This note in the doc seems to indicate that it might work. So I
tried to do more research by Googling the terms "postgres base table" and
"postgres partition root table" (both mentioned in the document note above),
but Google finds pretty much nothing for either term. So the documentation
note doesn't really help me to discern what will work and what won't.

I believe the doc note above should be revised to clarify what works and
doesn't work in relation to partitioning and logical replication, and
perhaps these two terms should be defined on this page.

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-09-26 08:53:43 Re: Do not use C++ style comments (// comments). Strict ANSI C compilers do not accept them.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-09-25 14:34:16 Re: BUG #16022: to_json on arrays with unusual lower bound is not intuitive