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

Reply via email to