Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication
От | Ashutosh Bapat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAExHW5u4hyqANz7SfPV_WQEy_GJMfhBYWsOSHc8pHMxHuSs=Vg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 4:08 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 at 09:47, Ashutosh Bapat > <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Vignesh, > > Thanks for the patches. > > > > On Sat, Aug 2, 2025 at 7:10 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The backport seems to be straight forward. Please let me know if you > > > > need my help in doing so, if we decide to backport the fix. > > > > > > Now that this has been reported on the back branches, we should > > > consider whether it's appropriate to backport the fix. Here are the > > > patches prepared for the back branches. > > > > PG14 and + patches do not test that DROP PUBLICATION does not disrupt > > the publication. I think we need to test that as well. > > Currently, the test across all branches except PG13 is the same test > used in the master branch. For PG13, since there was no existing > subscription, I modified the test slightly to accommodate that. If I > handle the comment you suggest, the test in master and the backbranch > will be different. Should we keep the test similar to the master or is > it ok to address your above comment and keep it different? IMO we should modify the test on master as well and either backpatch both commits or backpatch after combining those two commits. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: