Re: Back-branch bugs with fully-prunable UPDATEs

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Back-branch bugs with fully-prunable UPDATEs
Дата
Msg-id 25275.1554656265@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Back-branch bugs with fully-prunable UPDATEs  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Back-branch bugs with fully-prunable UPDATEs  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 5:28 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> This test script works fine in HEAD:
>> In v11, it suffers an assertion failure in ExecSetupPartitionTupleRouting.
>> In v10, it doesn't crash, but we do get
>> WARNING:  relcache reference leak: relation "parttbl" not closed

> What we did in the following commit is behind this:
> commit 58947fbd56d1481a86a03087c81f728fdf0be866
> Before this commit, partitioning related code in the executor could
> always rely on the fact that ModifyTableState.resultRelInfo[] only
> contains *leaf* partitions.  As of this commit, it may contain the
> root partitioned table in some cases, which breaks that assumption.

Ah.  Thanks for the diagnosis and patches; pushed.

I chose to patch HEAD similarly to v11, even though no bug manifests
right now; it seems safer that way.  We should certainly have the
test case in HEAD, now that we realize there wasn't coverage for this.

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Julien Rouhaud
Дата:
Сообщение: Trailing whitespaces in various documentations
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: change password_encryption default to scram-sha-256?