sivakumar krishnamurthy <sivakumar.mailinglist at gmail.com> writes:
> Hackers,
>    Is there any specific reason to generate an UPDATE query (in LogTrigger)
> when both the old and new value are the same?
> Can't we ignore the replication of this particular row silently?
>
> I am referring to the following comment in slony1_funcs.c
>
> /*
>                  * It can happen that the only UPDATE an application does is to
> set a
>                  * column to the same value again. In that case, we'd end up
> here with
>                  * no columns in the SET clause yet. We add the first key
> column here
>                  * with it's old value to simulate the same for the replication
>                  * engine.
>                  */

Triggers on the table may still need to fire; they certainly did, on the
origin, and they may also need to, on subscribers.

How would you propose to configure a determination that sometimes the
tuple can be ignored silently, and sometimes the update still needs to
take place?
-- 
select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'ca.afilias.info';
Christopher Browne
"Bother,"  said Pooh,  "Eeyore, ready  two photon  torpedoes  and lock
phasers on the Heffalump, Piglet, meet me in transporter room three"