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?
Thanks,
Amit
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers