On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 4:35 PM tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com <tanghy.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Monday, September 27, 2021 1:32 PM, vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Attached v33 patch has the preprocess_pubobj_list review comment fix > >suggested by Alvaro at [1]. The > >v33-0006-Alternate-grammar-for-ALL-TABLES-IN-SCHEMA.patch patch has > >the grammar changes as suggested by Alvaro at [1]. If we agree this is > >better, I will merge this into the 0001 patch. > >[1] - > >https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202109241325.eag5g6mpvoup%40alvherre.pgsql > > About the schema patch, I think a schema and a table which belongs to this > schema shouldn't be specified at the same time. > But what if someone uses "ALTER TABLE ... SET SCHEMA ..." after "CREATE > PUBLICATION"? > > For example: > > create schema sch1; > create schema sch2; > create table sch2.t (a int); > create publication pub1 for all tables in schema sch1, table sch2.t; alter > table sch2.t set schema sch1; > > postgres=# \dRp+ > Publication pub1 > Owner | All tables | Inserts | Updates | Deletes | Truncates | Via root > ----------+------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+------ > ----------+------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+---- > postgres | f | t | t | t | t | f > Tables: > "sch1.t" > Tables from schemas: > "sch1" > > Table t has been output twice. > I think this should not be supported, should we do something for this > scenario?
Yes this should not be supported, we should throw an error in this case. This is handled in the v34 patch attached at [1]. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm2Z9TfuoCf09YGKfwy7F1NwC4iCXJGTaZS%3DchH6VHtadQ%40mail.gmail.com Regards, Vignesh
