On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 3:50 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 10:19 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Regarding the 0001 patch, it seems to me that UPDATE and DELETE are > > allowed on the table even if its replica identity is set to generated > > columns that are not published. For example, consider the following > > scenario: > > > > create table t (a int not null, b int generated always as (a + 1) > > stored not null); > > create unique index t_idx on t (b); > > alter table t replica identity using index t_idx; > > create publication pub for table t with (publish_generated_columns = false); > > insert into t values (1); > > update t set a = 100 where a = 1; > > > > The publication pub doesn't include the generated column 'b' which is > > the replica identity of the table 't'. Therefore, the update message > > generated by the last UPDATE would have NULL for the column 'b'. I > > think we should not allow UPDATE and DELETE on such a table. > > > > I see the same behavior even without a patch on the HEAD. See the > following example executed on HEAD: > > postgres=# create table t (a int not null, b int generated always as (a + 1) > postgres(# stored not null); > CREATE TABLE > postgres=# create unique index t_idx on t (b); > CREATE INDEX > postgres=# alter table t replica identity using index t_idx; > ALTER TABLE > postgres=# create publication pub for table t; > CREATE PUBLICATION > postgres=# insert into t values (1); > INSERT 0 1 > postgres=# update t set a = 100 where a = 1; > UPDATE 1 > > So, the update is allowed even when we don't publish generated > columns, if so, why do we need to handle it in this patch when the > user gave publish_generated_columns=false? > > Also, on the subscriber side, I see the ERROR: "publisher did not send > replica identity column expected by the logical replication target > relation "public.t"".
Good point. > Considering this, I feel if find this behavior buggy then we should > fix this separately rather than part of this patch. What do you think? Agreed. It's better to fix it separately. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
