Re: Publication of same parent table with ONLY-ness mismatch should error

On Fri, Oct 23, 2026 at 1:24 PM Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 21, 2026, at 06:58, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Oops. The previously posted patch v5 was broken/incomplete.
> >
> > PSA patch v6.
> >
> > ======
> > Kind Regards,
> > Peter Smith.
> > Fujitsu Australia
> > <v6-0001-Error-if-same-table-has-ONLY-mismatch.patch>
>
> V6 overall LGTM.
>
> A nit comment:
> ```
> + if (list_member_oid(relids_explicit, myrelid) &&
> + recurse != list_member_oid(relids_recursing, myrelid) &&
> + rel->rd_rel->relkind != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE)
> + ereport(ERROR,
> + (errcode(ERRCODE_DUPLICATE_OBJECT),
> + errmsg("conflicting ONLY specifications for table \"%s\"",
> + RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
> ```
>
> Would it be slightly better to put rel->rd_rel->relkind != RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE first? So that partitioned tables skip both list searches.
>

Agreed. Done as suggested.

PSA v7.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia