| From: | "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tomas Vondra" <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Amit Kapila" <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Petr Jelinek" <petr(dot)jelinek(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences |
| Date: | 2022-02-23 22:05:58 |
| Message-ID: | eb0ae88d-954c-4e74-8a77-b1d01f096dff@www.fastmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022, at 4:18 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 2/23/22 18:33, Euler Taveira wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022, at 1:07 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> Maybe, but I don't think it's very common to have that many
> >> schemas added to the same publication. And it probably does not
> >> make much difference whether you have 1000 or 2000 items in the
> >> list - either both are acceptable or unacceptable, I think.
> >
> > Wouldn't it confuse users? Hey, duplicate publication. How? Wait.
> > Doh.
> >
>
> I don't follow. Duplicate publications? This talks about rows in
> pg_publication_namespace, not pg_publication.
I was referring to
Publications:
"testpub_schemas" (sequences)
"testpub_schemas" (tables)
versus
Publications:
"testpub_schemas" (tables, sequences)
I prefer the latter.
--
Euler Taveira
EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | samay sharma | 2022-02-23 22:11:33 | Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-02-23 22:05:15 | Re: reallocing without oom check in pg_regress |