On 2017/04/17 14:46, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Amit Langote
> wrote:
>> By the way, Petr said in the other thread that it could be made a no-op
>> (presumably without requiring IF NOT EXISTS) on the grounds that
>> membership of table in
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Amit Langote
wrote:
> By the way, Petr said in the other thread that it could be made a no-op
> (presumably without requiring IF NOT EXISTS) on the grounds that
> membership of table in publication is "soft object" or "property"
On 2017/04/15 8:53, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 4/13/17 06:23, Amit Langote wrote:
>> create table bar (a int);
>> create publication mypub for table bar;
>> alter publication mypub add table bar;
>> ERROR: relation "bar" is already member of publication "mypub"
>>
>> 2nd command should be a
On 4/13/17 06:23, Amit Langote wrote:
> create table bar (a int);
> create publication mypub for table bar;
> alter publication mypub add table bar;
> ERROR: relation "bar" is already member of publication "mypub"
>
> 2nd command should be a no-op, IMHO.
We generally require a IF NOT EXISTS in
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
>> I wonder if trying to add a relation to a publication that it is already a
>> part should be considered a no-op, instead of causing an error (which
>> happens in the
Amit Langote writes:
> I wonder if trying to add a relation to a publication that it is already a
> part should be considered a no-op, instead of causing an error (which
> happens in the ALTER PUBLICATION ADD TABLES case).
On what grounds?
The equivalent case for
I wonder if trying to add a relation to a publication that it is already a
part should be considered a no-op, instead of causing an error (which
happens in the ALTER PUBLICATION ADD TABLES case).
create table bar (a int);
create publication mypub for table bar;
alter publication mypub add table