Re: Oddity in tuple routing for foreign partitions

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Oddity in tuple routing for foreign partitions
Date: 2018-04-25 17:59:40
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYJGbgtMxC2XXL6sC4owkzvmiRy=Xt1+EHELsn_Tendfg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:19 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> I tried to do that. So, attached are two patches.
>
> 1. Fix for ExecInitPartitionInfo to use the right RT index to pass to
> InitResultRelInfo
>
> 2. v5 of the patch to fix the bug of foreign partitions
>
> Thoughts?

Are you splitting this into 2 patches here because there are 2
separate issues? If so, what are those issues? There seem to be a
bunch of interrelated changes here but I haven't seen a clear
explanation of which ones are needed for which reasons.

I agree that fixing ExecInitPartitionInfo to use the right RT index in
the first place sounds like a better idea than trying to piece
together which RT index we should be using after-the-fact, but I need
to better understand what problems we're trying to fix here before I
can be sure if that's the strategy I want to endorse...

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-04-25 18:01:29 Re: perltidy version
Previous Message Stas Kelvich 2018-04-25 17:55:08 Re: unused_oids script is broken with bsd sed