| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: adding partitioned tables to publications |
| Date: | 2020-01-08 10:57:13 |
| Message-ID: | 537f34c5-0029-faf2-d14a-af4fb766b467@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-01-07 15:18, Rafia Sabih wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 06:02, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Rebased and updated to address your comments.
>>
> + <para>
> + Partitioned tables are not considered when <literal>FOR ALL TABLES</literal>
> + is specified.
> + </para>
> +
> What is the reason for above, I mean not for the comment but not
> including partitioned tables in for all tables options.
This comment is kind of a noop, because the leaf partitions are already
included in FOR ALL TABLES, so whether partitioned tables are considered
included in FOR ALL TABLES is irrelevant. I suggest removing the
comment to avoid any confusion.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2020-01-08 11:58:23 | Re: Fastpath while arranging the changes in LSN order in logical decoding |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-01-08 10:54:52 | Re: adding partitioned tables to publications |