SEZ9 commented on issue #12267:
URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/issues/12267#issuecomment-5754889349

   Thanks @1362227089, the combined `pg_class`/`pg_namespace` result settles it.
   
   There is a single relation for `testdb.test_a` (OID `334287`), while on the 
`highgo` database `information_schema.tables` returns six identical `BASE 
TABLE` rows for the same identifier, and the connector log shows the same six 
`including 'highgo.testdb.test_a' for further processing` lines. So the 
duplicate is introduced at table discovery by HighGo's `information_schema` 
view, not by a duplicated table at the storage layer. The empty result on 
`cflag` is consistent with that as well.
   
   On `dev` at `5f7f5c1dbbb490436605cef37b47a5b30d5acdd1`, 
`PostgresDialect.discoverDataCollections()` goes through 
`TableDiscoveryUtils.listTables()`, which appends every included 
`INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES` row, and the later map construction rejects the 
repeated `TableId`. The fix should drop exact duplicate `TableId` values at 
that discovery boundary (keeping catalog/schema/table identity intact) rather 
than teaching the downstream map to pick a winner.
   
   Would you like to open the PR for this? If so, please link it here first so 
we keep a single implementation path. It should include a regression test in 
the existing PostgreSQL CDC coverage that feeds duplicate discovery rows and 
asserts a single `TableId`, plus confirmation that plain PostgreSQL discovery 
output is unchanged. A HighGo-backed integration case would also be welcome if 
the HighGo JDBC driver can be made available in the test environment — please 
let us know whether that is feasible on your side.
   
   Leaving the issue open for that focused fix.
   
   <!-- streview-comment:1209 -->


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to