| From: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Logical replication without a Primary Key |
| Date: | 2017-12-07 19:53:21 |
| Message-ID: | 5b854760-6243-9d75-4614-88ee34e15854@anastigmatix.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/07/2017 02:38 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> A B C
> foo,bar,baz
> foo,bar,baz
>
> And then I say:
>
> UPDATE test set A = 1 where C = baz
>
> I have updated two rows because there is no primary key to identify the
> differences. Both of those rows should be updated and thus replicated
Would the subscriber see two records reporting update of a
foo,bar,baz row to 1, so it would do that to (arbitrarily)
one of them the first time, and (necessarily) the other, the
second time?
Or is that not the way it would work?
-Chap
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-12-07 19:58:01 | Re: Signals in a BGW |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2017-12-07 19:48:12 | Re: [HACKERS] CUBE seems a bit confused about ORDER BY |