On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 09:00, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 21, 2025 1:31 AM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 at 17:31, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 10:31 AM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Attached patch has the fix for this issue which includes the > > > > partition tables also for the publication now and throws a warning > > > > appropriately. > > > > > > > > > > The corresponding query (see "To find which tables might potentially > > > include non-local origins .." on [1]) on the create_subscription doc > > > page. > > > > > BTW, the proposed fix is not backpatcheable as it changes the catalog > > > which requires catversion bump. However, as this is a WARNING case, if > > > we can't find a fix that can't be backpatched, we can fix it in > > > HEAD-only. > > > > I could not find a way to fix the back version without changing the catalog > > version. > > > > The attached v3 version has the changes for the same. > > Thanks for the patch. > > I agree that covering the partitioned table case when checking the non-local > origin data on publisher is an improvement. But I think adding or extending > the > SQL functions may not be the appropriate way to fix because the new functions > cannot be used in older PG version and is also not backpatchable. > > I am thinking it would be better to use the existing pg_partition_ancestors() > and pg_partition_tree() to verify the same, which can be used in all supported > PG versions and is also backpatchable. > > And here is another version which fixed the issue like that. I have not added > tests for it, but I think it's doable to write the something like the > testcases > provided by Sergey. This patch does not fix the foreign tabel as that seems to > be a separate issue which can be fixed independtly. > > Hi Sergey, if you have the time, could you please verify whether this patch > resolves the partition issue you reported? I've confirmed that it passes the > partitioned tests in the scripts, but I would appreciate your confirmation for > the same. >
Hi Hou-san, I have created a patch to add a test for the patch. v5-0001 : same as v4-0001 v5-0002: adds the testcase Thanks and Regards, Shlok Kyal
v5-0001-Improve-logging-for-data-origin-discrepancies-in-.patch
Description: Binary data
v5-0002-Test-for-Improve-logging-for-data-origin-discrepa.patch
Description: Binary data
