On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 5:44 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 12:02 PM Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So yeah, documenting the ATTACH issue as a limitation sounds like the > > best course for now. I might word it as follows and add it under > > Notes at https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-createpublication.html: > > > > "ATTACHing a table into a partition tree whose root is published using > > a publication with publish_via_partition_root set to true does not > > result in the table's existing contents to be replicated." > > Instead of "to be", shall we use "being"?
That reads better. > > I'm not sure there's a clean enough workaround to this that we can add > > to the paragraph. > > > > Does that make sense? > > > > Yeah, that sounds reasonable. I think the case with > "publish_via_partition_root = false" should work but please test it > once. Yeah, I did test that case to compare and didn't see a problem with it. > The other thing which we need to consider about all these fixes > is whether to back patch them or not. I think it is on case to case > basis. I feel this limitation should be documented and backpatched, > what do you think? Feel free to submit patches accordingly. I agree with backpatching the doc fix. I've attached a diff against master, though it also appears to apply to 13 and 14 branches. -- Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
document-ATTACH-limitation.diff
Description: Binary data
