On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 8:27 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 5:25 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Future -- there probably need to be further clarifications/emphasis to > > describe how the generated column replication feature only works for > > STORED generated columns (not VIRTUAL ones), but IMO it is better to > > address that separately *after* dealing with these missing > > documentation patches. > > > > I thought it was better to deal with the ambiguity related to the > 'virtual' part first. I have summarized the options we have regarding > this in an email [1]. I prefer to extend the current option to take > values as 's', and 'n'. This will keep the room open to extending it > with a new value 'v'. The primary reason to go this way is to avoid > adding new options in the future. It is better to keep the number of > subscription options under control. Do you have any preference? >
Hi, During my review of Vignesh's patch for the enum-version of publish_generated_columns, I was thinking of yet another way to specify which columns to replicate. My idea below is analogous to the existing 'publish' option; Instead of adding an option specific to generated column types why don't we instead add a (string) option for controlling the publication of *all* column types? Synopsis: publish_column_types = <col_types>[,...] where <col_types> are 'normal', 'generated_stored', 'generated_virtual'. The default value is 'normal', which just means everything that's not generated ~ This option would be overriding if a publication column list is specified, same as the current implementation does. ~ And, just like the 'publish' option the effect is cumulative: e.g.1. WITH (publish_column_types = 'normal') == default behavior. publishes all normal columns same as PG17 e.g.2. WITH (publish_column_types = 'normal, generated_stored') == publishes all normal cols AND stored gencols e.g.3. WITH (publish_column_types = 'generated_stored') == publishes only the stored gencols and nothing else Notice that some combinations (like example 3 above with a FOR ALL TABLES) are not even possible using master, or Vignesh's patch. Maybe having this extra flexibility is useful for someone? ~ Also, having a generic name 'publish_column_types' leaves this open to be extended with more possible values in the future without proliferating more publication options. Thoughts? ====== Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
