| From: | Manuel Reyes Bravo <manuelreyesbravo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_get_object_address reports a published relation as non-existent |
| Date: | 2026-09-17 15:07:27 |
| Message-ID: | CA+bCEdCUEVL=6QAE2Pmj5evqKtvePBeOmOoAxVF7agTx4-=iWg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Álvaro,
Yes, it does. The address names a catalog row, not a (table,
publication) pair: FOR TABLE gives a pg_publication_rel row, FOR TABLES
IN SCHEMA gives a pg_publication_namespace row, which is how
object_address.sql round-trips it ('publication namespace', '{addr_nsp}',
'{addr_pub_schema}'), and FOR ALL TABLES gives nothing beyond the
publication itself, as pg_depend shows. So nothing is missing, and
comparing with pg_publication_tables was the wrong frame.
I withdraw the patch.
Regards,
Manu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Xuneng Zhou | 2026-09-17 15:16:57 | Re: Reject WAIT FOR earlier in transaction-snapshot mode |
| Previous Message | Richard Guo | 2026-09-17 14:58:33 | Re: issues with eager aggregation |