Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"

On 6/10/17 02:02, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com
> <mailto:sawada.mshk@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com
>     <mailto:jeff.janes@gmail.com>> wrote:
>     > If I create a publication "for all tables", \dRp+ doesn't indicate it is for
>     > all tables, it just gives a list of the tables.
>     >
>     > So it doesn't distinguish between a publication specified to be for all
>     > tables (which will be dynamic regarding future additions), and one which
>     > just happens to include all the table which currently exist.
>     >
>     > That seems unfortunate.  Should the "for all tables" be included as another
>     > column in \dRp and \dRp+, or at least as a footnote tag in \dRp+ ?
>     >
> 
>     +1. I was thinking the same. Attached patch adds "All Tables" column
>     to both \dRp and \dRp+.
> 
> 
> Looks good to me.  Attached with regression test expected output  changes.

I have committed your patch and removed the "Tables" footer for
all-tables publications, as was discussed later in the thread.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services