| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: MERGE issues around inheritance |
| Date: | 2025-05-26 10:40:54 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCVT42s3c6uX-Bt25VnoHgvRCstFqn44iJqmpOh--Cyi8A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 07:46, Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Dean,
>
> "it is possible for the parent to be excluded from the
> plan and so all of the entries in the resultRelInfo array may be for
> different relations than rootResultRelInfo."
>
> I didn't fully understand the above sentence. Can you give me more information or an example?
> If the parent is excluded from the plan, the first entry in the resultRelInfo array will not be the parent but some surviving child.
There's an example in the updated regression tests. A non-inherited
CHECK constraint on the parent causes the planner to exclude the
parent from the relations being scanned and from the resultRelInfo
array, so the first resultRelInfo entry is for a child relation.
Regards,
Dean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2025-05-26 11:03:46 | Re: MERGE issues around inheritance |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2025-05-26 10:35:11 | Re: MERGE issues around inheritance |