Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication
От | Justin Pryzby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20220103144056.GB24477@telsasoft.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 11:31:39AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Did the DatumGetBool issue expose a deficiency in testing ? > > I think the !am_partition path was never being hit. > > Hmm, the TAP test creates a subscription that contains both types of > tables. I tried adding an assert for each case, and they were both hit > on running the test. Yes, I know both paths are hit now that it uses GetBool. What I'm wondering is why tests didn't fail when one path wasn't hit - when it said am_partition=DatumGetChar(); if (!am_partition){} I suppose it's because the am_partition=true case correctly handles nonpartitions. Maybe the !am_partition case should be removed, and add a comment that pg_partition_tree(pg_partition_root(%u))) also handles non-partitions. Or maybe that's inefficient... -- Justin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: