Horton

Re: [HACKERS] Bug in ExecModifyTable function and trigger issues for foreign tables

Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>, Ildus Kurbangaliev <i.kurbangaliev@postgrespro.ru>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2017-11-27T17:22:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 27 November 2017 at 16:35, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
>>> A separate point -- it might be marginally more efficient to have the
>>> work of rewriteTargetListUD() done after expand_targetlist() to avoid
>>> the possible renumbering of the resjunk entries.
>
>> Hm.  It wouldn't save a lot, but yeah, doing it in this order seems
>> a bit silly when you put it like that.
>
> On looking closer, the reason it's like that in Fujita-san's patch
> is to minimize the API churn seen by FDW AddForeignUpdateTargets
> functions, specifically whether they see a tlist that's before or
> after what expand_targetlist() does.  I'm doubtful that the
> potential savings is worth taking risks there.  In particular,
> it seems like a good thing that expand_targetlist() verifies the
> correct tlist ordering *after* the FDW function has acted.
> So now my inclination is to leave this alone.
>

Ah yes, that seems like a worthwhile check to keep. Never mind then.

Regards,
Dean

Commits

  1. Fix creation of resjunk tlist entries for inherited mixed UPDATE/DELETE.