| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, YeXiu <1518981153(at)qq(dot)com>, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Skipping schema changes in publication |
| Date: | 2026-02-19 04:52:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JWz=+-zEhQRszrGEbOzYKReXtsS9hGycWubHV8v2U-QA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 10:15 AM Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> We did not implement the EXCEPT clause for ALL SEQUENCES to avoid
> additional complexity in the patch.
>
Fair enough.
> And thought of implementing it
> after this patch gets committed.
> What do you suggest? Is it ok or should we also implement EXCEPT
> clause for ALL SEQUENCES for this patch itself?
>
I am fine with doing it as a separate patch but let's try to get that
done immediately after the main patch (FOR ALL TABLES EXCEPT ...) is
committed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Henson Choi | 2026-02-19 05:00:21 | Re: Row pattern recognition |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2026-02-19 04:47:51 | Re: Row pattern recognition |