Re: Expanding HOT updates for expression and partial indexes

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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