| From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications |
| Date: | 2026-05-17 01:32:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAHut+PuF+MxJMCCMK-uXLusc9dCqkaSnbaPW4kTXDS3q8CMFZA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 11:32 PM Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
...
> > Also, since the assert was not yet modified, how does this even pass
> > the tests if 'alltables' was false?
> >
>
> As you pointed out in the next (7th) comment also, the first two
> patches are not calling GetExcludedPublicationTables(), but are using
> get_publication_relations() directly. Hence, the tests are passing
> even without the assert modification. But patch-0003 does call it, so
> the assert was updated there.
>
Ah, I missed that -- thanks for the explanation.
======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrei Lepikhov | 2026-05-17 06:03:15 | Re: Sequence Access Methods, round two |
| Previous Message | Chao Li | 2026-05-17 00:37:24 | Re: doc: fix pg_restore_extended_stats() example syntax |