On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Do we need to update documentation? Perhaps, some clarification on the > inheritance/partitioning behavior somewhere. Yeah, I think so. > - Assert((enrmd->reliddesc == InvalidOid) != (enrmd->tupdesc == NULL)); > + Assert((enrmd->reliddesc == InvalidOid) != > + (enrmd->tupdesc == NULL)); > > Perhaps, unintentional change? Agreed; line is not long enough to need to wrap. > I'm not sure if it's significant for transition tables, but what if a > partition's BR trigger modified the tuple? Would we want to include the > modified version of the tuple in the transition table or the original as > the patch does? Same for the code in CopyFrom(). Good spot! If the BR trigger on the child table modifies or suppresses the action, I strongly feel that must be reflected in the transition table. This needs to be fixed. -- Kevin Grittner VMware vCenter Server https://www.vmware.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
