On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:42 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On 3/14/22 12:12, houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > On Monday, March 14, 2022 5:08 AM Tomas Vondra > > <tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > Anyway, the fix does not address tablesync, as explained in [1]. I'm not > sure what to do about it - in principle, we could calculate which > relations to sync, and then eliminate "duplicates" (i.e. relations where > we are going to sync an ancestor). >
As mentioned in my previous email [1], this appears to be a base code issue (even without row filter or column filter work), so it seems better to deal with it separately. It has been reported separately as well [2] where we found some similar issues. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1LSb-xrvGEm3ShaRA%3DMkdii2d%2B4vqh9DGPvVDA%2BD9ibYw%40mail.gmail.com [2] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/os0pr01mb5716dc2982cc735fde38880494...@os0pr01mb5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
