| From: | "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 303677365(at)qq(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18729: update with multiple subpartitions return error: too many range table entries |
| Date: | 2024-12-02 15:37:59 |
| Message-ID: | 14c14680-63a7-41b3-b45a-eff4b4d7e24f@app.fastmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Dec 2, 2024, at 4:07 AM, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
> UPDATE rqg_table3 T2
> SET c2 = T2.c2 || '该行序号不正确;'
> WHERE NOT EXISTS (
> SELECT NULL
> FROM (
> SELECT c1, c0, c2 AS RIGHT_NUM
> FROM rqg_table3
> ORDER BY c1
> ) T3
> WHERE T3.RIGHT_NUM = T2.c2
> AND T3.c0 = T2.c0
> );
It works for v14+. That's because there were some partitioning improvements. In
particular, the commit 86dc90056 and follow up commits. The release notes
describe it as "Improve the performance of updates and deletes on partitioned
tables with many partitions".
I would say that it is time to move from v13 because it is now the oldest
supported version.
--
Euler Taveira
EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2024-12-02 23:00:53 | Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails |
| Previous Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2024-12-02 08:36:22 | Re: BUG #18728: Inconsistency between pg_wait_events.name and pg_stat_activity.wait_event for LWLocks |