From Tue, Sept 14, 2021 11:53 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:06 PM tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com > <tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > 6. > > I think if I use 'ALTER PUBLICATION ... SET', both the list of tables > > and the list of all tables in schemas should be reset. The publication > > should only contain the tables and all tables in schemas which user > > specified. If user only specified all tables in schema, and didn't > > specify tables, the tables which used to be part of the publication > > should be dropped, too. But currently, if I didn't specify tables, the list > > of > tables wouldn't be set to empty. Thoughts? > > > > I think we can go either way here but it seems like we should drop the tables > in > the case you mentioned. The idea is that the SET variant in ALTER PUBLICATION > should replace the set of tables and schemas for the publication which seems > to be in line with the current behavior where we replace the set of tables. > > Anyone else wants to weigh in on this?
I agree that the one SET variant should replaces both the list-of-tables and the list-of-schemas. Best regards, Hou zj
