Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications

From: Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications
Date: 2026-07-20 07:21:28
Message-ID: CABdArM75UjHV2FPXSUTNAVaUxyR_jbuCoa0qnfEnJws3Px-SFQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 9:50 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Nisha.
>
> I noticed multiple places where these patches want to discover the
> root partition table OID, but they are not interested in the ancestor
> tree.
>
> I've created another thread/patch [1] to introduce a
> `get_partition_root` C function. I think this could simplify some of
> your code by removing the requirement to declare and free the unwanted
> ancestor lists.
>
> Please take a look and give your +1 there if you think it would be useful.
>

Okay, the idea looks reasonable to me. I'll review the patch and share
my thoughts on the thread.

--
Thanks,
Nisha

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zsolt Parragi 2026-07-20 07:35:04 Unlogged materialized views
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2026-07-20 07:16:02 Re: Restore vacuum_delay_point() in GIN posting-tree leaf vacuum