From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: bug in update tuple routing with foreign partitions |
Date: | 2019-04-19 05:55:53 |
Message-ID: | 371168e6-2955-9f32-3f5e-ead8e56f8cef@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019/04/19 14:39, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2019/04/19 13:00), Amit Langote wrote:
>> On 2019/04/18 22:10, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>>> * I kept all the changes in the previous patch, because otherwise
>>> postgres_fdw would fail to release resources for a foreign-insert
>>> operation created by postgresBeginForeignInsert() for a tuple-routable
>>> foreign table (ie, a foreign-table subplan resultrel that has been updated
>>> already) during postgresEndForeignInsert().
>>
>> Hmm are you saying that the cases for which we'll still allow tuple
>> routing (foreign table receiving moved-in rows has already been updated),
>> there will be two fmstates to be released -- the original fmstate
>> (UPDATE's) and aux_fmstate (INSERT's)?
>
> Yeah, but I noticed that that explanation was not correct. (I think I was
> really in hurry.) See the correction in [1].
Ah, I hadn't noticed your corrected description in [1] even though your
message was in my inbox before I sent my email.
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matsumura, Ryo | 2019-04-19 06:21:14 | Patch: doc for pg_logical_emit_message() |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-04-19 05:51:29 | Re: Unhappy about API changes in the no-fsm-for-small-rels patch |