Hi, > > Outside the scope of special TimescaleDB tables and the speculated > > pg_partman old-style table migration, will this proposed new feature > > have any other application? In other words, do you know if this > > proposal will be of any benefit to the *normal* users who just have > > native PostgreSQL inherited tables they want to replicate? > > I think it comes down to why an inheritance scheme was used. If it's > because you want to group rows into named, queryable subsets (e.g. the > "cities/capitals" example in the docs [1]), I don't think this has any > utility, because I assume you'd want to replicate your subsets as-is. > > But if it's because you've implemented a partitioning scheme of your > own (the docs still list reasons you might want to [2], even today), > and all you ever really do is interact with the root table, I think > this feature will give you some of the same benefits that > publish_via_partition_root gives native partition users. We're very > much in that boat, but I don't know how many others are.
I would like to point out that inheritance is merely a tool for modeling data. Its use cases are not limited to only partitioning, although many people ended up using it for this purpose back when we didn't have a proper built-in partitioning. So unless we are going to remove inheritance in nearest releases (*) I believe it should work with logical replication in a sane and convenient way. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I got an impression that the patch tries to accomplish just that. (*) Which personally I believe would be a good change. Unlikely to happen, though. -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev
