Hi Amit,
(2018/03/06 15:28), Amit Langote wrote:
On 2018/03/05 22:00, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
An alternative fix for this would be to handle the set/reset of
estate->es_result_relation_info in a higher level ie, ExecModifyTable,
like the attached:
Your patch seems like a good cleanup overall, fixes this bug, and seems to
make future maintenance easier. So, +1. I agree that doing a surgery
like this on COPY is better left for later.
Thanks for the review! I'll leave that for another patch, then.
I noticed (as you may have too) that it cannot be applied to the 10 branch
as is. I made the necessary changes so that it can be. See attached
patch with filename suffixed "-10backpatch". Also attached is your patch
unchanged to have both of them together.
Thanks for that!
One thing I notice while working on this is this in ExecInsert/CopyFrom,
which I moved to ExecPrepareTupleRouting as-is for the former:
/*
* If we're capturing transition tuples, we might need to convert
from the
* partition rowtype to parent rowtype.
*/
if (mtstate->mt_transition_capture != NULL)
{
if (resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc &&
(resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc->trig_insert_before_row ||
resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc->trig_insert_instead_row))
{
/*
* If there are any BEFORE or INSTEAD triggers on the
partition,
* we'll have to be ready to convert their result back to
* tuplestore format.
*/
mtstate->mt_transition_capture->tcs_original_insert_tuple =
NULL;
mtstate->mt_transition_capture->tcs_map =
TupConvMapForLeaf(proute, rootRelInfo, leaf_part_index);
}
Do we need to consider INSTEAD triggers here? The partition is either a
plain table or a foreign table, so I don't think it can have those
triggers. Am I missing something?
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
