Re: Distinguish publication exclusions in object addresses

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Manuel Reyes Bravo <manuelreyesbravo(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Distinguish publication exclusions in object addresses
Date: 2026-09-18 10:41:32
Message-ID: CAA4eK1KeZ3VD1wbAQt9p8FrOYM0Cv-ytyjq8AaLXrpJXdK9F3Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 10:17 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 9:56 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
>
> > It is better to start a new thread if one really feels
> > one or or the other way is correct.
>
> I agree.
>

I have pushed the patch.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2026-09-18 10:54:45 Re: aio: Async fsyncs for crash recovery and checkpointer
Previous Message Virender Singla 2026-09-18 10:37:48 Re: Do we reduce autovacuum_naptime max values