Re: deferred primary key and logical replication
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: deferred primary key and logical replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1K8Yofek4UzFCkO6YPHvnrFjZLyD7EXypZOSu4-jBkLSA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | deferred primary key and logical replication (Euler Taveira <euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: deferred primary key and logical replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:41 AM Euler Taveira <euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > While looking at an old wal2json issue, I stumbled on a scenario that a table > with a deferred primary key is not updatable in logical replication. AFAICS it > has been like that since the beginning of logical decoding and seems to be an > oversight while designing logical decoding. > I am not sure if it is an oversight because we document that the index must be non-deferrable, see "USING INDEX records the old values of the columns covered by the named index, which must be unique, not partial, not deferrable, and include only columns marked NOT NULL." in docs [1]. Now sure this constraint is when we use USING INDEX for REPLICA IDENTITY but why it has to be different for PRIMARY KEY especially when UNIQUE constraint will have similar behavior and the same is documented? [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/sql-altertable.html -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: