From: David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: nico.lichtmaier@gmail.com <nico.lichtmaier@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Isn't "publication" wrongly defined here?
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 14:19:10 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKFQuwbaQGcwpVayCu2GaX-Ja4Uno9koToBnnbKO8Lb75SDcyw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <152485493360.19803.15458021985994949783@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
References: <152485493360.19803.15458021985994949783@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
On Friday, April 27, 2018, PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/logical-
> replication-publication.html
> Description:
>
> In section 31.1 it says "A publication is a set of changes generated from a
> table or a group of tables"... that seems wrong. It's a set of relations,
> tables, whatevers. No the changes themselves. Right?
>
It's correct. The subscriber receives ongoing "events" which are the
logical changes to all tables defined within the publication. The items of
interest are the ongoing changes, the list of tables is just a table of
contents for which change sets are present.
David J.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: david.g.johnston@gmail.com, nico.lichtmaier@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Isn't "publication" wrongly defined here?
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwbaQGcwpVayCu2GaX-Ja4Uno9koToBnnbKO8Lb75SDcyw@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox