On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 3:13 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On further thinking about this, I think we should define the behavior > of replication among partitioned (on the publisher) and > non-partitioned (on the subscriber) tables a bit more clearly. > > - If the "publish_via_partition_root" is set for a publication then we > can always replicate to the table with the same name as the root table > in publisher. > - If the "publish_via_partition_root" is *not* set for a publication > then we can always replicate to the tables with the same name as the > non-root tables in publisher. > > Thoughts? >
I'd adjust that wording slightly, because "we can always replicate to ..." sounds a bit vague, and saying that an option is set or not set could be misinterpreted, as the option could be "set" to false. How about: - If "publish_via_partition_root" is true for a publication, then data is replicated to the table with the same name as the root (i.e. partitioned) table in the publisher. - If "publish_via_partition_root" is false (the default) for a publication, then data is replicated to tables with the same name as the non-root (i.e. partition) tables in the publisher. ? Regards, Greg Nancarrow Fujitsu Australia
