Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables

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>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Subject: Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables
Date: 2018-03-20 04:39:26
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018/03/20 13:30, Amit Langote wrote:
> I have incorporated your patch in the main patch after updating the
> comments a bit. Also, now that 6666ee49f49 is in [1], the transition
> table related tests I proposed yesterday pass nicely. Instead of posting
> as a separate patch, I have merged it with the main patch. So now that
> planner refactoring is unnecessary, attached is just one patch.

Sorry, I forgot to remove a hunk in the patch affecting
src/include/optimizer/prep.h. Fixed in the attached updated version.


Attachment Content-Type Size
v7-0001-Fix-ON-CONFLICT-to-work-with-partitioned-tables.patch text/plain 42.0 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2018-03-20 04:57:19 Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2018-03-20 04:36:00 Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql - additional extra checks