Re: CREATE TABLE .. PARTITION OF fails to preserve tgenabled for inherited row triggers

From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: CREATE TABLE .. PARTITION OF fails to preserve tgenabled for inherited row triggers
Date: 2021-07-17 01:02:59
Message-ID: 20210717010259.GU20208@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 06:01:12PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Jul-16, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > CREATE TABLE p(i int) PARTITION BY RANGE(i);
> > CREATE TABLE p1 PARTITION OF p FOR VALUES FROM (1)TO(2);
> > CREATE FUNCTION foo() returns trigger LANGUAGE plpgsql AS $$begin end$$;
> > CREATE TRIGGER x AFTER DELETE ON p1 EXECUTE FUNCTION foo();
> > CREATE TRIGGER x AFTER DELETE ON p EXECUTE FUNCTION foo();
>
> Hmm, interesting -- those statement triggers are not cloned, so what is
> going on here is just that the psql query to show them is tripping on
> its shoelaces ... I'll try to find a fix.
>
> I *think* the problem is that the query matches triggers by name and
> parent/child relationship; we're missing to ignore triggers by tgtype.
> It's not great design that tgtype is a bitmask of unrelated flags ...

I see it's the subquery Amit wrote and proposed here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+HiwqEiMe0tCOoPOwjQrdH5fxnZccMR7oeW=f9FmgszJQbgFg@mail.gmail.com

.. and I realize that I've accidentally succeeded in breaking what I first
attempted to break 15 months ago:

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 02:57:40PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I'm happy to see that this doesn't require a recursive cte, at least.
> I was trying to think how to break it by returning multiple results or results
> out of order, but I think that can't happen.

If you assume that pg_partition_ancestors returns its results in order, I think
you can fix it by adding LIMIT 1. Otherwise I think you need a recursive CTE,
as I'd feared.

Note also that I'd sent a patch to add newlines, to make psql -E look pretty.
v6-0001-fixups-c33869cc3bfc42bce822251f2fa1a2a346f86cc5.patch

--
Justin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2021-07-17 02:36:09 Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates
Previous Message John Naylor 2021-07-17 00:02:33 Re: speed up verifying UTF-8