On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 6:25 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Interesting case. So I think the root of the problem is the same as > > what we have for a column is marked unique to the subscriber but not > > to the publisher. In short, two transactions which are independent of > > each other on the publisher are dependent on each other on the > > subscriber side because table definition is different on the > > subscriber. So can't we handle this case in the same way by marking > > this table unsafe for parallel-apply? > > > > Yes, we can do that. I think Hou-San has already dealt that way in his > latest patch [1]. See his response in the email [1]: "Disallow > replicating from or to a partitioned table in parallel streaming > mode". > > [1] - > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS0PR01MB57160760B34E1655718F4D1994249%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Okay, somehow I missed the latest email. I will look into it soon. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
