| From: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables |
| Date: | 2017-06-16 12:29:17 |
| Message-ID: | 428f1672-df54-de01-91da-b57365193bf4@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/06/16 19:26, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Etsuro Fujita
>> Ashutosh mentioned his concern about what I proposed above before [2], but
>> I'm not sure we should address that. And there have been no opinions from
>> him (or anyone else) since then. So, I'd like to leave that for committer
>> (ie, +1 for Ready for Committer).
>
> That issue has not been addressed. The reason stated was that it would
> make code complicated. But I have not had chance to look at how
> complicated would be and assess myself whether that's worth the
> trouble.
I have to admit that what I proposed upthread is a quick-and-dirty
kluge. One thing I thought to address your concern was to move
rewriteTargetListUD entirely from the rewriter to the planner when doing
inherited UPDATE/DELETE, but I'm not sure that's a good idea, because at
least I think that would need a lot more changes to the rewriter.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Константин Евтеев | 2017-06-16 13:13:36 | Re: BUG #14699: Statement trigger and logical replication |
| Previous Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2017-06-16 10:45:24 | Re: Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables |