Thread

  1. Re: BUG #19099: Conditional DELETE from partitioned table with non-updatable partition raises internal error

    amit <amitlangote09@gmail.com> — 2025-10-30T09:17:43Z

    On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 5:55 PM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 at 13:29, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 3:44 PM Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 at 10:31, I wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > >  I mean, we I believe we need to execute
    > > > > CheckValidResultRel against all partitions in ExecInitModifyTable, at
    > > > > least when no partition pruning has been performed
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > So, the problem is that we managed to exclude all child relations, and
    > > > only have a single (dummy) root relation as a result of the
    > > > modifyTable plan. Maybe we should populate its target list with
    > > > pseudo-junk columns in create_modifytable_plan ?
    > > >
    > > > For instance, they query does not error-out if we have at least one
    > > > another non-file-fdw partition:
    > > >
    > > > create table p2 partition of pt for values in ( 2) ;
    > > >
    > > > this is because we have this in create_modifytable_plan
    > > >
    > > > ```
    > > > /* Transfer resname/resjunk labeling, too, to keep executor happy */
    > > > apply_tlist_labeling(subplan->targetlist, root->processed_tlist);
    > > > ```
    > > >
    > > > and we successfully found a junk column in the p2 partition.
    > > >
    > > > The problem is, it works iff root->processed_tlist has at least one
    > > > relation which can give us junk columns. Should we add handling for
    > > > corner case here?
    > > > Another option is to remove this 'Transfer resname/resjunk labeling'
    > > > completely and rework planner-executer contracts somehow.
    > >
    > > I am not really sure if we should play with the planner code.
    > >
    > > I suspect the real issue is that we’re assuming partitioned tables
    > > always need a ctid, which wasn’t true before MERGE started using the
    > > root ResultRelInfo. In fact, the old code already looked wrong -- it’s
    > > been requiring a ctid even for partitioned tables where that was never
    > > necessary. We can fix this by only requiring the junk ctid when we
    > > actually operate through the root partitioned table, that is, for
    > > MERGE.  Like the attached.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Thanks, Amit Langote
    >
    > Hi! Thanks for the patch. I can see your points, however I am unsure
    > if this is the most right thing to do.
    > As per ab5fcf2b04f9 commit message and
    > src/backend/optimizer/plan/planner.c comments, I am under impression
    > that the postgres-way of fixing that would allow for
    > ExecInitModifyTable to operate with a NULL result relation list.
    
    Isn't that what happens with my patch?
    
    > And, in any case, I am still unsure if we should allow the 'DELETE'
    > statement from Alexander's repro to successfully execute, which yout
    > patch still does
    
    What behavior do you propose in that case? The WHERE false part makes
    the plan a dummy ModifyTable on the root partitioned table pt (per
    ab5fcf2b0 I guess), and there’s nothing left in the plan that can be
    flagged at execution time; the error Alexander reported is a bug we're
    trying to fix.  Are you suggesting instead that the attempt to plan
    DELETE on the file_fdw partition -- or any foreign table that doesn’t
    support DELETE -- should be prevented?
    
    -- 
    Thanks, Amit Langote