Re: RFC: logical publication via inheritance root?

From: Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RFC: logical publication via inheritance root?
Date: 2023-01-06 21:55:47
Message-ID: CAAWbhmiQWEGv73En15WRJ5PmhbwwTdBxMiPxunGghW0G-WVAYg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 10:21 AM Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
> Some inheritance hierarchies won't be "partitioned" hierarchies, of
> course, but the user can simply not set that replication option for
> those publications.

The more I noodle around with this approach, the less I like it: it
feels overly brittle, we have to deal with multiple inheritance
somehow, and there seem to be many code paths that need to be
partially duplicated. And my suggestion that the user could just opt
out of problematic cases would be a bad user experience, since any
non-partition inheritance hierarchies would just silently break.

Instead...

> (Alternatively, I can imagine a system where an
> extension explicitly marks a table as having a different "publication
> root", and then handling that marker with the existing replication
> option. But that may be overengineering things.)

...I'm going to try this approach next, since it's opt-in and may be
able to better use the existing code paths.

--Jacob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2023-01-06 21:56:11 Re: GROUP BY ALL
Previous Message Arne Roland 2023-01-06 21:29:12 Permute underscore separated components of columns before fuzzy matching