| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, 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: | 2018-04-19 19:00:45 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZCLimjt9zxVG7nsBRWJ9Q5JnrbeFyoZh1WMC8+-x6e=w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> Amit Langote wrote:
>> Yeah, I too have wondered in the past what it would take to make
>> equalTupDescs() return true for parent and partitions. Maybe we can make
>> it work by looking a bit harder than I did then.
>
> How about simply relaxing the tdtypeid test from equalTupleDescs? I
> haven't looked deeply but I think just checking whether or not both are
> RECORDOID might be sufficient, for typecache purposes.
That strike me as a very scary thing to do. There's code all over the
system that may have non-obvious assumptions about the behavior of
equalTupleDescs(), and I don't think we can have any confidence that
nothing will break unless we do a detailed audit of all that code.
> If we just remove the tdtypeid test, check-world passes.
That does not reassure me.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-04-19 19:01:24 | Re: Built-in connection pooling |
| Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2018-04-19 18:59:57 | Re: Corrupted btree index on HEAD because of covering indexes |