From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Shouldn't duplicate addition to publication be a no-op? |
Date: | 2017-04-13 12:33:52 |
Message-ID: | 11698.1492086832@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> I wonder if trying to add a relation to a publication that it is already a
> part should be considered a no-op, instead of causing an error (which
> happens in the ALTER PUBLICATION ADD TABLES case).
On what grounds?
The equivalent case for inheritance is an error:
regression=# create table foo (a int);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# create table bar () inherits (foo);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# alter table bar inherit foo;
ERROR: relation "foo" would be inherited from more than once
(Your example purporting to show the contrary contains a typo.)
If there's a reason why this case should act differently from that
precedent, you haven't shown it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2017-04-13 12:37:08 | Re: pg_statistic_ext.staenabled might not be the best column name |
Previous Message | Yorick Peterse | 2017-04-13 12:29:33 | Re: [PATCH] Document the order of changing certain settings when using hot-standby servers |