Re: Invalid Assert while validating REPLICA IDENTITY?

On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 11:44 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 4:48 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Sept 2024 at 18:22, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 3:32 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 11:21 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > While working on some other code I noticed that in
> > > > > FindReplTupleInLocalRel() there is an assert [1] that seems to be
> > > > > passing IndexRelation to GetRelationIdentityOrPK() whereas it should
> > > > > be passing normal relation.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Agreed. But this should lead to assertion failure. Did you try testing it?
> > >
> > > No, I did not test this particular case, it impacted me with my other
> > > addition of the code where I got Index Relation as input to the
> > > RelationGetIndexList() function, and my local changes were impacted by
> > > that.  I will write a test for this stand-alone case so that it hits
> > > the assert.  Thanks for looking into this.
> >
> > The FindReplTupleInLocalRel function can be triggered by both update
> > and delete operations, but this only occurs if the relation has been
> > marked as updatable by the logicalrep_rel_mark_updatable function. If
> > the relation is marked as non-updatable, an error will be thrown by
> > check_relation_updatable. Given this, if a relation is updatable, the
> > IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull condition might always evaluate to
> > true due to the previous checks in logicalrep_rel_mark_updatable.
> > Therefore, it’s possible that we might not encounter the Assert
> > statement, as IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull may consistently be
> > true.
> > Thoughts?
>
> With that it seems that the first Assert condition is useless isn't it?
>

The second part of the assertion is incomplete. The
IsIndexUsableForReplicaIdentityFull() should be used only when the
remote relation has REPLICA_IDENTITY_FULL set. I haven't tested all
possible cases yet but I think the attached should be a better way to
write this assertion.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.