Re: [DEPARSE] EXPLAIN prints another ModifyTable's RETURNING aliases in a SubPlan

From: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com>, assam258(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [DEPARSE] EXPLAIN prints another ModifyTable's RETURNING aliases in a SubPlan
Date: 2026-10-21 21:25:36
Message-ID: CAEZATCU-9jk8csgW89THESnz80wGZDgnrey3EqJsUKDXuCBpXw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 at 22:15, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 at 19:00, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Anyway, for a back-patchable fix I favor the fragment I showed,
> >> which keeps the lower-level aliases if any and only pushes down
> >> the upper aliases if there are no aliases in the rule.
>
> > That is consistent with the way a Vars' varReturningType is propagated
> > -- if the rule action's RETURNING list causes a Var to have a
> > non-default VarRetruningType, that cannot be overridden by the
> > triggering query.
>
> So just to clarify, you now agree with that fix instead of dropping
> the new Asserts?

Yes, I'm fine either way actually, because I think it's not
particularly likely to come up in practice.

Regards,
Dean

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2026-10-21 21:43:29 Re: [DEPARSE] EXPLAIN prints another ModifyTable's RETURNING aliases in a SubPlan
Previous Message Tom Lane 2026-10-21 21:15:12 Re: [DEPARSE] EXPLAIN prints another ModifyTable's RETURNING aliases in a SubPlan