| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: DOCS - Clarify behaviour when EXCEPT tables are moved/renamed |
| Date: | 2026-06-17 07:23:20 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LwjuHJJ2Jm3pT8TMqD=9iu8fT3Eji65kFEu=aCnpapsw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 9:04 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> A documentation gap was identified [1] regarding the new publication
> FOR ALL TABLES EXCEPT behaviour. e.g. what happens if an excluded
> table is renamed or moved?
>
> This patch addresses that gap.
>
> Note that the patch uses different text from what was previously
> suggested because, when I checked with AI, it proposed this much
> simpler wording.
>
I find the previous wording proposed by me better as it has some
explanation especially: "Once a table is excluded, the exclusion
applies to that table itself, regardless of its name or schema", So
ideally, we can keep the wording proposed or adjust with some
explanation using the above part.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-06-17 07:23:33 | Re: Require SSL connection to postgres for oauth |
| Previous Message | Chao Li | 2026-06-17 07:22:44 | Re: Fix bug of CHECK constraint enforceability recursion |