|From:||Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|To:||Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2018/03/23 3:42, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> A slightly improved version attached. Apart from doc cleanup based on
> earlier feedback, fixed one assertion failure based on Rahila's report.
> This was happening when target relation is referenced in the source
> subquery. Fixed that and added a test case to test that situation.
> Rebased on current master.
I tried these patches (applied 0002 on top of 0001). When applying 0002,
I got some apply errors:
The next patch would create the file
which already exists! Assume -R? [n]
I managed to apply it by ignoring the errors, but couldn't get make check
to pass; attached regressions.diffs if you want to take a look.
Btw, is 0001 redundant with the latest patch on ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE
thread? Can I apply just 0002 on top of that patch? So, I tried that --
that is, skipped your 0001 and instead applied ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE
patch, and then applied your 0002. I had to fix a couple of places to get
MERGE working correctly for partitioned tables; attached find a delta
patch for the fixes I made, which were needed because I skipped 0001 in
favor of the ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE patch. But the regression test failure
I mentioned above didn't go away, so it seems to have nothing to do with
|Next Message||Michael Paquier||2018-03-23 04:46:39||Re: [PoC PATCH] Parallel dump to /dev/null|
|Previous Message||Amit Kapila||2018-03-23 04:12:41||Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions|