On Wed, May 6, 2026 at 10:55 PM Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I didn’t review this patch earlier because, from the subject, I thought it
> > was only about recomputing generated stored columns. I just noticed that
> > the patch also changes the inheritance-table path, and I posted another
> > patch for the inheritance-table bug. Please see [1].
> >
> > I tried applying the new tests from my patch on top of this patch, and it
> > looks like this patch still does not fix the multi-inheritance case.
> >
> > So I’d like to check with you how we should proceed. I think there are two
> > options:
> >
> > 1. Keep this patch focused on the generated-column issue described in the
> > subject, and use my patch to fix the inheritance-table bug.
> > 2. I can continue from this patch and extend it to fix the
> > multi-inheritance case as well.
> >
> > Please let me know what you prefer.
Thanks for your help on this! I agree that separating the patches
would be better.
> I just looked into v9 and made a fix in ExecInitForPortionOf() that resolves
> the bug with multi-inheritance tables. I also added a test case for that.
>
> The inheritance-table bug affects not only UPDATE, but also DELETE, so I
> added test cases for DELETE as well. Please see 0002 for my changes.
>
> To make each commit self-contained, would you mind moving the code for the
> inheritance-table fix to 0002? Then you can keep focusing on 0001, and I can
> continue working on 0002.
>
> PFA v10 - 0001 the same as v9. 0002 fixed a bug with multi-inheritance tables.
I'll post a v11 addressing the feedback in your other email and moving
the fixes for partitions/inheritance.
Yours,
--
Paul ~{:-)
[email protected]
