On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2017/09/12 19:56, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> I think the code here expects the original parent_rte and not the one
>> we set around line 1169.
>>
>> This isn't a bug right now, since both the parent_rte s have same
>> content. But I am not sure if that will remain to be so. Here's patch
>> to fix the thinko.
>
> Instead of the new bool is_parent_partitioned, why not move the code to
> set partitioned_rels to the block where you're now setting
> is_parent_partitioned.
>
> Also, since we know this isn't a bug at the moment but will turn into one
> once we have step-wise expansion, why not include this fix in that patch
> itself?
It won't turn into a bug with step-wise expansion since every
parent_rte will have RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE for a partitioned top
parent, which is used to extract the partitioned_rels. But I guess,
it's better to fix the thinko in step-wise expansion since parent_rte
itself changes.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers