On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 7:36 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On 22.01.22 03:54, Amit Kapila wrote: > > Won't we already do that for Alter Subscription command which means > > nothing special needs to be done for this? However, it seems to me > > that the idea we are trying to follow here is that as this option can > > lead to data inconsistency, it is good to allow only superusers to > > specify this option. The owner of the subscription can be changed to > > non-superuser as well in which case I think it won't be a good idea to > > allow this option. OTOH, if we think it is okay to allow such an > > option to users that don't have superuser privilege then I think > > allowing it to the owner of the subscription makes sense to me. > > I don't think this functionality allows a nonprivileged user to do > anything they couldn't otherwise do. You can create inconsistent data > in the sense that you can choose not to apply certain replicated data. >
I thought this will be the only primary way to skip applying certain transactions. The other could be via pg_replication_origin_advance(). Or are you talking about the case where we skip applying update/delete where the corresponding rows are not found? I see the point that if we can allow the owner to skip applying updates/deletes in certain cases then probably this should also be okay. Kindly let us know if you have something else in mind as well? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
