| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | kehan5800(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #19893: REPLICA IDENTITY FULL: UPDATE/DELETE skipped when a subscriber-only column has a value |
| Date: | 2026-11-13 08:21:58 |
| Message-ID: | f759253fc1562784b05bdd8ab16f2b989010bee3.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, 2026-11-11 at 22:19 +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
> The subscriber's table may have columns that the published table does not
> have: "The target table can also have additional columns not provided by
> the published table. Any such columns will be filled with the default value
> as specified in the definition of the target table." (Logical Replication,
> Subscription). If the published table has REPLICA IDENTITY FULL, the
> subscriber's table has no primary key or replica identity index, and such
> a subscriber-only column holds a value (a DEFAULT, an identity column, or a
> value set on the subscriber), then no UPDATE or DELETE of the table is
> applied. For each one the apply worker logs an update_missing or
> delete_missing conflict (on 17, nothing at the default log level) and goes
> on, so the subscriber keeps the old version of every updated row and every
> deleted row. Inserts are replicated normally. A subscriber-only column that
> is NULL does not cause this, and neither does the same column in a table
> that has a primary key on the subscriber.
I think that is just fine; at best, it could be documented.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shveta malik | 2026-11-13 08:42:17 | Re: BUG #19864: pg_get_publication_tables() gets cache lookup error after concurrent DROP PUBLICATION |
| Previous Message | Maxim Orlov | 2026-11-13 08:16:45 | Re: to_date()/to_timestamp() silently accept month=0 and day=0 |