On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 2:55 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 2:36 PM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 21 Jul 2025 at 11:15, Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > 3. Some of the syntaxes works for sequence which doesn't make sense to > > > me, as listed below, I think there are more > > > > > > postgres[154731]=# CREATE PUBLICATION insert_only FOR ALL SEQUENCES > > > WITH (publish = 'insert'); > > > CREATE PUBLICATION > > > > > > postgres[154731]=# CREATE PUBLICATION pub FOR ALL SEQUENCES WITH ( > > > PUBLISH_VIA_PARTITION_ROOT ); > > > CREATE PUBLICATION > > > > There is a documentation for this at sql-createpublication.html: > > WITH ( publication_parameter [= value] [, ... ] ) > > This clause specifies optional parameters for a publication when > > publishing tables. This clause is not applicable for sequences. > > > > I felt it was enough, should we do anything more here? > > > > It would be better if we can give ERROR for options that are not > specific to sequences. >
Alter-PUB also should give an error then. Currently it works postgres=# alter publication pub1 set (publish='insert,update'); ALTER PUBLICATION pub1 here is an all-sequence publication. Also, we need to decide behaviour for a publication with 'all tables, all sequences' having such WITH options for both CREATE and ALTER-PUB. The options are valid for tables but not for sequences. In such a case, giving an error might not be correct. For this particular case, we can give a NOTICE saying options not applicable to sequences. Thoughts? thanks Shveta
