Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoYYnN9jLaWwzFUiwB1-rC=2q6xwqayuVNTCP+Cyc1Ku3Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 5:46 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I understand, it is to ensure that for deleted rows, nothing
> more needs to be done.  For example, see the below check in
> ExecUpdate/ExecDelete.
> if (!ItemPointerEquals(tupleid, &hufd.ctid))
> {
> ..
> }
> ..
>
> Also a similar check in ExecLockRows.  Now for deleted rows, if the
> t_ctid wouldn't point to itself, then in the mentioned functions, we
> were not in a position to conclude that the row is deleted.

Right, so we would have to find all such checks and change them to use
some other method to conclude that the row is deleted.  What method
would we use?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] statement_timeout is not working as expected with postgres_fdw
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Alter subscription..SET - NOTICE message is comingfor table which is already removed