On Wed, Nov 11, 2026 at 1:05 PM Zhijie Hou <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Sun, Sep27, 2026 at 10:26 PM Mihail Nikalayeu wrote: > > Attached is v2 of the remaining fixes, rebased on master and > > registered in the commitfest as [3] for tracking purposes. > > > > I tried to combine everything into the series. It is mostly > > AI-generated, but I still think structuring everything is helpful > > anyway. > > > > The rule throughout is that a partition pending detach is published as > > a standalone table, as it will be after FINALIZE; publishing it via > > the former root would cause the divergence Nisha described in [1]. > > > > 0001 (pgoutput crash): The test comment Shveta asked about was > > misleading; it's fixed. pgindent-clean applied. > > Since we are considering whether to push 0001 first, I reviewed it and > have few suggestions: > > 1. We can remove the am_partition variable completely and simply check > "ancestors" in the subsequent code, to be consistent with > RelationBuildPublicationDesc. > > 2. The test can be simplified to cover only the decoding crash (since > the subscriber side is not touched by this patch), which saves buildfarm > test time. In addition, we can move the test into the existing isolation > test to speed it up further. > > I have attached a top-up patch for 0001 with these changes. Feel free to > merge it if it looks good.
I agree with the changes. Few concerns: It would be better to show in the additional steps that pg_inherits.inhdetachpending is true before we actually try pg_logical_slot_get_binary_changes. Also I feel it would make more sense to create-pub with default publish_via_partition_root rather than publish_via_partition_root=true for PG19's testcase. thanks Shveta
