| From: | "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: Confused comment about drop replica identity index |
| Date: | 2021-12-15 09:18:26 |
| Message-ID: | OS3PR01MB6275A10D03572E27C4E2C9769E769@OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 15, 2021 at 11:25AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Yeah, the comment is wrong. If the index of a REPLICA_IDENTITY_INDEX is
> dropped, I recall that the behavior is the same as REPLICA_IDENTITY_NOTHING.
Thank you for your response.
I agreed that the comment is wrong.
> Not sure about the DROP INDEX page, but I'd be fine with mentioning that in the
> ALTER TABLE page in the paragraph related to REPLICA IDENTITY. While on it, I
> would be tempted to switch this stuff to use a list of <variablelist> for all the option
> values. That would be much easier to read.
Yeah, if we can add some details to pg-doc and code comments, I think it will
be more friendly to PG users and developers.
Regards,
Wang wei
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-12-15 10:13:21 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-12-15 08:50:45 | Re: A test for replay of regression tests |