On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 12:00 PM Nisha Moond <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 11:21 AM Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 10:21 AM Peter Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Some review comments for v3: > > > > > > ====== > > > Commit Message > > > > > > 1. > > > Fix this by distinguishing EXCEPT entries in the object address code. > > > They are now reported as publication excluded relation, with object > > > identities indicating that the table is excluded from the publication. > > > > > > ~ > > > > > > Should "publication excluded relation" be quoted here? > > > > > > > I have changed the commit message. > > > > > > > > ====== > > > src/backend/catalog/objectaddress.c > > > > > > 2. > > > static ObjectAddress > > > -get_object_address_publication_rel(List *object, > > > +get_object_address_publication_rel(ObjectType objtype, List *object, > > > Relation *relp, bool missing_ok) > > > > > > If not going to describe parameter `objType` then maybe a > > > self-documenting Assert would be good to have here. > > > > > > > Added assert in the attached patch and changed the if/else to simplify the > > code. > > > > Should the new Assert be at the start of the function? At the current > position, we have already locked the relation and done some > unnecessary processing by then.
Yes, that will be better IMO. thanks Shveta
