On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 03:28:48PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> 1. Another concern is the function *get_partition_ancestors*,
> which may return NIL, which may affect *llast_oid*, which does not handle
> NIL entries.
Hm? We already know in the code path that the relation we are dealing
with when calling get_partition_ancestors() *is* a partition thanks to
the check on relispartition, no? In this case, calling
get_partition_ancestors() is valid and there should be a top-most
parent in any case all the time. So I don't get the point of checking
get_partition_ancestors() for NIL-ness just for the sake of assuming
that it would be possible.
> 2. Is checking *relispartition* enough?
> There a function *check_rel_can_be_partition*
> (src/backend/utils/adt/partitionfuncs.c),
> which performs a much more robust check, would it be worth using it?
>
> With the v2 attached, 1 is handled, but, in this case,
> will it be the most correct?
Saying that, your point about the result of SearchSysCacheAttName not
checked if it is a valid tuple is right. We paint errors in these
cases even if they should not happen as that's useful when it comes to
debugging, at least.
--
Michael