On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 2:18 PM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:22 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't deny that this can allow some additional cases than we allow > > today but was just not sure whether users really need it. If we want > > to go with such an option then as mentioned earlier, we should > > consider another proposal for subscriber-side truncate [1] because we > > might need a cascade operation there as well but for a slightly > > different purpose. > > I'm thinking how we can utilize the truncate option proposed at [1] > for the idea here. Because, currently the truncate option(proposed at > [1]) is boolean, (of course we can change this to take "cascade", > "restrict" options). But how can we differentiate the usage of the > truncate option at [1] for two purposes 1) for before copy > data/initial table sync operation and 2) for the replication of > TRUNCATE command as proposed here in this thread. Any thoughts? >
I think we can do this as a separate patch. Let's not try to combine both patches. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
