Re: [GENERAL] Making subscribers read only in Postgres 10 logical replication

You mean at the user permissions level? Yes, I could, but would mean doing so table by table, which is not our current structure. I guess there is nothing at the database level. -- Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-general-f1843780.html -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing

[GENERAL] Making subscribers read only in Postgres 10 logical replication

Hi I'm testing out logical replication on PostgreSQL 10. Is there a setting to make subscribers read-only slaves like with Slony. Currently I can insert into the Publisher and the Subscriber. If there is a conflict, i.e. same record exists in both, then all replication gets backed up (even to other

Re: [GENERAL] Partitioned postgres tables don't need update trigger??

Perfect! Thanks for the response! Just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.nabble.com/Partitioned-postgres-tables-don-t-need-update-trigger-tp5906403p5906415.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

[GENERAL] Partitioned postgres tables don't need update trigger??

I am working with partitioned tables. I have partitioned based on date and I have the INSERT trigger in place, I don't have an Update or Delete Trigger but both updates and deletes against the master table work correctly. I am not sure how these are working without triggers. Any insight? So, this

[GENERAL] Partitioned tables do not return affected row counts to client

We are looking to move from one large table to partitioned tables. Since the inserts and updates are made to the master table and then inserted into the appropriate partitioned table based on the trigger rules, the affected_rows returned to the client (PHP in this case) is always 0. We have been us

[GENERAL] Inserting into a master table with partitions does not return rows affected.

I am moving towards a partitioned schema. I use a function to insert into the table. If the INSERT fails because of duplicates I do an UPDATE. This works fine currently on the non-partitioned table because I can use GET DIAGNOSTICS to get the row count on the INSERT. But when I use the Master tabl

Re: [GENERAL] Primary key vs unique index

Yes I am using that option for one of my POstgres 9.1 database and it works well. But its still an issue with Foreign keys, which you need to drop and recreate . Also I use Slony for replication and it uses the primary key to check repl. So I don't want that to be interrupted by dropping PK and rec

Re: [GENERAL] Primary key vs unique index

We are experiencing a similar problem, even though we are on 8.4 and have been for a while, and have autovacuum turned on. I have regular concurrent reindexes on the indexes but the primary key is seriously bloated. I was considering doing the same thing, that is, create another primary key that is