| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Burd <greg(at)burd(dot)me> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Expanding HOT updates for expression and partial indexes |
| Date: | 2026-03-16 17:29:55 |
| Message-ID: | abg-E2beQqAS6-wk@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 12:23:04PM -0400, Greg Burd wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2026, at 5:11 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> Why do extra work in ExecBRUpdateTriggers() to eliminate the false
>> negative case if we don't rely on it anyway? If we do need to rely on
>> it in subsequent patches, then we need to be sure, right?
>
> [...]
>
> What do we "need to be sure" of? That ExecGetAllUpdatedCols() not really
> contains all attributes that its name implies? I think it now does that
> after 0002, do you disagree?
I'm admittedly still digging into the details, but the main question on my
mind is whether there are other cases lurking that our in-tree tests aren't
catching or that only exist in extensions. Will there be some sort of
check or assertion to catch those?
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2026-03-16 17:34:59 | Re: pg_plan_advice |
| Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2026-03-16 17:29:21 | Re: EXPLAIN: showing ReadStream / prefetch stats |