MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALDaNm0gwjY_4HFxvvty01BOT01q_fJLKQ3pWP9=9orqubhjcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <TYAPR01MB5866C758B1185217950ED13CF5029@TYAPR01MB5866.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CALDaNm0WSo5369pr2eN1obTGBeiJU9cQdF6Ju1sC4hMQNy5BfQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALDaNm0WSo5369pr2eN1obTGBeiJU9cQdF6Ju1sC4hMQNy5BfQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2022 15:56:25 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHut+PsAWaETh9VMymbBfMrqiE1KuqMq+wpBg0s7eMzwLATr+w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup
To: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Cc: "kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>, 
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHut%2BPsAWaETh9VMymbBfMrqiE1KuqMq%2BwpBg0s7eMzwLATr%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Vignesh, I also have not looked at the patch yet, but I have what
seems like a very fundamental (and possibly dumb) question...

Basically, I do not understand the choice of syntax for setting things up.

IMO that "only-local" option sounds very similar to the other
PUBLICATION ("publish") options which decide the kinds of things that
will be published. So it feels more natural for me to think of the
publisher as being the one to decide what will be published.

e.g.

option 1:
CREATE PUBLICATION p1 FOR TABLE t1;
CREATE SUBSCRITION s1 ... FOR PUBLICATION p1 WITH (only_local = true);

option 2:
CREATE PUBLICATION p1 FOR TABLE t1 WEHRE (publish = 'only_local');
CREATE SUBSCRITION s1 ... FOR PUBLICATION p1;

~~

IIUC the patch is using option 1. My first impression was it feels
back-to-front for the SUBSCRIPTION telling the PUBLICATION what to
publish.

So, why does the patch use syntax option 1?

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith
Fujitsu Australia