From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci(at)gmail(dot)com>, japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
Date: | 2021-12-15 01:17:37 |
Message-ID: | CAHut+PuzvTknr0ShXWHXT8ssYKgTu=K0-xN0KfA67kHr5uOMLw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:12 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:50 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 4:44 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Few other comments:
> > ===================
>
> Few more comments:
> ==================
> v46-0001/0002
> ===============
> 1. After rowfilter_walker() why do we need
> EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE? I thought this is primarily to identify
> the expressions that are not allowed in rowfilter which we are now
> able to detect upfront with the help of a walker. Can't we instead use
> EXPR_KIND_WHERE?
FYI - I have tried this locally and all tests pass.
~~
If the EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE is removed then there will be some
differences:
- we would get errors for aggregate/grouping functions from the EXPR_KIND_WHERE
- we would get errors for windows functions from the EXPR_KIND_WHERE
- we would get errors for set-returning functions from the EXPR_KIND_WHERE
Actually, IMO this would be a *good* change because AFAIK those are
not all being checked by the row-filter walker. I think the only
reason all tests pass is that there are no specific regression tests
for these cases.
OTOH, there would also be a difference where an error message would
not be as nice. Please see the review comment from Vignesh. [1] The
improved error message is only possible by checking the
EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE.
~~
I think the best thing to do here is to leave the
EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE but simplify code so that the improved
error message remains as the *only* difference in behaviour from the
EXPR_KIND_WHERE. i.e. we should let the other
aggregate/grouping/windows/set function checks give errors exactly the
same as for the EXPR_KIND_WHERE case.
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-12-15 01:47:24 | Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three - remastered set |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-12-15 01:02:28 | Re: Life cycles of tuple descriptors |