| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | kedar anavardekar <kedar(dot)anavardekar(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Takeshi Ideriha <iderihatakeshi(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Publication of same parent table with ONLY-ness mismatch should error |
| Date: | 2026-10-23 02:23:29 |
| Message-ID: | 1215F1EF-D571-4CB3-9627-4A12AA058202@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Oct 21, 2026, at 06:58, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Oops. The previously posted patch v5 was broken/incomplete.
>
> PSA patch v6.
>
> ======
> Kind Regards,
> Peter Smith.
> Fujitsu Australia
> <v6-0001-Error-if-same-table-has-ONLY-mismatch.patch>
V6 overall LGTM.
A nit comment:
```
+ if (list_member_oid(relids_explicit, myrelid) &&
+ recurse != list_member_oid(relids_recursing, myrelid) &&
+ rel->rd_rel->relkind != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE)
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_DUPLICATE_OBJECT),
+ errmsg("conflicting ONLY specifications for table \"%s\"",
+ RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
```
Would it be slightly better to put rel->rd_rel->relkind != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE first? So that partitioned tables skip both list searches.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Koshi Shibagaki (Fujitsu) | 2026-10-23 03:04:38 | Re: [PATCH] reindexdb: Fix schema name lookup in parallel mode |
| Previous Message | Chao Li | 2026-10-23 01:59:36 | Re: Incremental backup can use a summary past a timeline switch |