Tom Lane писал 2021-06-01 21:19:
> Alexander Pyhalov <a.pyhalov@postgrespro.ru> writes:
>> What about the following patch?
>
> ISTM that using a specific rowtype rather than RECORD would be
> quite disastrous from the standpoint of bloating the number of
> distinct resjunk columns we need for a partition tree with a
> lot of children. Maybe we'll have to go that way, but it seems
> like an absolute last resort.
Why do you think they are distinct?
In suggested patch all of them will have type of the common ancestor
(root of the partition tree).
>
> I think a preferable fix involves making sure that the correct
> record-type typmod is propagated to record_in in this context.
> Alternatively, maybe we could insert the foreign table's rowtype
> during execution of the input operation, without touching the
> plan as such.
>
> Could we start by creating a test case that doesn't involve
> uncommittable hacks to the source code?
Yes, it seems the following works fine to reproduce the issue.
--
Best regards,
Alexander Pyhalov,
Postgres Professional