| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Invalid Assert while validating REPLICA IDENTITY? |
| Date: | 2024-09-11 04:35:42 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JvbFm73oOpQS+Zoxg4DQpQTsddO2RuxSL=d3N1pOAqnQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 2:16 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 11:36 AM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Sept 2024 at 13:12, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The second part of the assertion is incomplete. The
> > > IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull() should be used only when the
> > > remote relation has REPLICA_IDENTITY_FULL set. I haven't tested all
> > > possible cases yet but I think the attached should be a better way to
> > > write this assertion.
> >
> > The changes look good to me.
> >
>
> Thanks, I'll push this tomorrow unless Dilip or anyone else has any
> comments. BTW, as the current code doesn't lead to any bug or
> assertion failure, I am planning to push this change to HEAD only, let
> me know if you think otherwise.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2024-09-11 04:45:08 | RE: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
| Previous Message | shveta malik | 2024-09-11 04:18:25 | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |