Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions?
| От | Michael Paquier |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20191111083201.GC1418@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions? (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 11:24:46AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > A comment in heap_multi_insert() needs to be updated because it > becomes the case with your patch: > /* > * We don't use heap_multi_insert for catalog tuples yet, but > * better be prepared... > */ > > There is also this one in DecodeMultiInsert() > * CONTAINS_NEW_TUPLE will always be set currently as multi_insert > * isn't used for catalogs, but better be future proof. Applying the latest patch, this results in an assertion failure for the tests of test_decoding. > (I am going to comment on the assertion issue on the other thread, I > got some suggestions about it.) This part has resulted in 75c1921, and we could just change DecodeMultiInsert() so as if there is no tuple data then we'd just leave. However, I don't feel completely comfortable with that either as it would be nice to still check that for normal relations we *always* have a FPW available. Daniel, your thoughts? I am switching the patch as waiting on author. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: