On 4/24/07, Pat Maddox <pergesu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the info.  Here's a response I got from someone on the
> postgres mailing list:
>
> http://cbbrowne.com/info/faq.html
> "Q: Is the ordering of tables in a set significant?
>
> A: Most of the time, it isn't. You might imagine it of some value to
> order the tables in some particular way in order that "parent" entries
> would make it in before their "children" in some foreign key
> relationship; that isn't the case since foreign key constraint triggers
> are turned off on subscriber nodes."
>
> How does that tie in?  I've read somewhere else that the locking
> issues crop up if you use table inheritance.  We definitely won't be.
> So do I still need to worry about the ordering of the IDs?


"Most of the time, it isn't" implies that some of the time it is. However we
haven't documented when it actually matters and what will happen if you have
the order wrong. I don't understand how the order of the table_ids matters
in any way. I always understood that table_ids were arbitrary and the order
didn't matter.

Can anyone provide an example of a situation where table id ordering would
actually matter? I can't think of any.

Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.slony.info/pipermail/slony1-general/attachments/20070425/=
66a51f35/attachment.htm