Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

Hello Rafia,

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:41 AM Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 at 08:06, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Thanks for sharing this case. I hadn't considered it, but you're
>> right that it should be handled sensibly. I have fixed table sync
>> code to handle this case properly. Could you please check your case
>> with the attached updated patch?
>>
> I was checking this today and found that the behavior doesn't change much with the updated patch. The tables are still replicated, just that a select count from parent table shows 0, rest of the partitions including default one has the data from the publisher. I was expecting more like an error at subscriber saying the table type is not same.
>
> Please find the attached file for the test case, in case something is unclear.

Thanks for the test case.

With the latest patch I posted, you'll get the following error on subscriber:

create subscription mysub connection 'host=localhost port=5432
dbname=postgres' publication mypub;
ERROR: cannot use relation "public.t" as logical replication target
DETAIL: "public.t" is a regular table on subscription side whereas a
partitioned table on publication side

Although to be honest, I'd rather not see the error. As I mentioned
in my email earlier, it'd be nice to be able sync a partitioned table
and a regular table (or vice versa) via replication.

Thanks,
Amit