Re: Useless "Replica Identity: NOTHING" noise from psql \d

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Useless "Replica Identity: NOTHING" noise from psql \d
Date: 2014-03-26 15:20:07
Message-ID: 20140326152007.GH9567@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:07:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > In the "INDEX" case, should the output mention specifically which index
> > > is being considered?
> >
> > Ah, good idea. Updated patch attached. The output is now:
> >
> > test=> \d+ test
> > Table "public.test"
> > Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
> > --------+---------+-----------+---------+--------------+-------------
> > x | integer | not null | plain | |
> > Indexes:
> > "test_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (x) REPLICA IDENTITY
> > "i_test2" btree (x)
> > --> Replica Identity: USING INDEX "test_pkey"
> > Has OIDs: no
> >
> > However, now that I look at it, it seems redundant as REPLICA IDENTITY
> > is already marked on the actual index. Ideas?
>
> Hearing nothing, I have gone back to the previous patch that just marks
> replica identity as USING INDEX; applied patch attached.

Not opposed to this, but it seems a bit strange; REPLICA IDENTITY is a
property of the table, not of any individual index. I think we should
lose the token in the "Indexes" section.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2014-03-26 15:28:59 Re: Useless "Replica Identity: NOTHING" noise from psql \d
Previous Message Thom Brown 2014-03-26 15:18:21 Re: [HACKERS] Duplicated row after promote in synchronous streaming replication