Re: transition table behavior with inheritance appears broken (was: Declarative partitioning - another take)

From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: transition table behavior with inheritance appears broken (was: Declarative partitioning - another take)
Date: 2017-05-18 13:38:51
Message-ID: CACjxUsN1P_YMhyU74MdpKeMgV+UwxESi1HotLtT75723dt5g=g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:

> Do we need to update documentation? Perhaps, some clarification on the
> inheritance/partitioning behavior somewhere.

Yeah, I think so.

> - Assert((enrmd->reliddesc == InvalidOid) != (enrmd->tupdesc == NULL));
> + Assert((enrmd->reliddesc == InvalidOid) !=
> + (enrmd->tupdesc == NULL));
>
> Perhaps, unintentional change?

Agreed; line is not long enough to need to wrap.

> I'm not sure if it's significant for transition tables, but what if a
> partition's BR trigger modified the tuple? Would we want to include the
> modified version of the tuple in the transition table or the original as
> the patch does? Same for the code in CopyFrom().

Good spot! If the BR trigger on the child table modifies or
suppresses the action, I strongly feel that must be reflected in the
transition table. This needs to be fixed.

--
Kevin Grittner
VMware vCenter Server
https://www.vmware.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Surafel Temesgen 2017-05-18 13:45:29 Re: Disallowing multiple queries per PQexec()
Previous Message Sveinn Sveinsson 2017-05-18 11:57:59 Re: [BUGS] BUG #14657: Server process segmentation fault in v10, May 10th dev snapshot