| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix tuple deformation with virtual generated NOT NULL columns |
| Date: | 2026-06-18 06:46:04 |
| Message-ID: | 96A79F87-ACDF-479F-B69D-0CACB7085C97@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Jun 18, 2026, at 14:27, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 at 17:56, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I don’t know why you added these commented SQL statements, I guess you have your reason. The problem is, in the 3 SELECTs, gtest21c should probably be gtest21d.
>
> This relates to the "-- keep these tests aligned with
> generated_stored.sql" at the top of the file.
>
> I mentioned in [1];
>> I pushed the patch to add the new test after modifying it to also
>> include the change in the generated_stored test, but with it commented
>> out. This is the method that 83ea6c540 introduced.
>
> and this is meant to follow the same pattern.
Thanks for the explanation.
>
> I've attached a version with the commented table names fixed. Thanks
> for looking.
>
> David
>
> [1] https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvrJBXEhet4=Es_wHBKdv5PCV5OGCaJOSmJexeaFqfmUHA@mail.gmail.com
> <fix_jit_deform_for_virtual_generated_cols_v3.patch>
This version feels all set.
I also tried to build and run tests, all passed.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Sharma | 2026-06-18 07:12:08 | Re: synchronized_standby_slots behavior inconsistent with quorum-based synchronous replication |
| Previous Message | cca5507 | 2026-06-18 06:44:26 | Re: Handle concurrent drop when doing whole database vacuum |