From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Expression errors with "FOR UPDATE" and postgres_fdw with partition wise join enabled. |
Date: | 2018-08-02 20:25:19 |
Message-ID: | 5358.1533241519@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? It seems to me that there
> are several people who are quite willing to complain about the fact
> that this hasn't been fixed, but not willing to express an opinion
> about the shape of the fix. Either the RMT needs to take executive
> action, or we need some more votes.
[ reads thread ... ]
Well, my vote is that I've got zero faith in either of these patches.
I do not trust Ashutosh's patch because of the point you noted that it
will kick in on ConvertRowtypeExprs that are not related to partitioning.
It's also got a rather fundamental conceptual (or at least documentation)
error in that it says it's making pull_var_clause do certain things to
all ConvertRowtypeExprs, but that's not what the code actually does.
I think the tension around that has a lot to do with the fact that the
patch went through so many revisions, and I don't have any faith that
it's right even yet. As you mentioned upthread, this might be insoluble
without some representational change for converted whole-row Vars.
As for Etsuro-san's patch, I don't like that for the same reasons you
gave. Also, I note that back towards the beginning of July it was
said that that patch depends on the assumption of no Gather below
an Append. That's broken *now*, not in some hypothetical future.
(See the nearby "FailedAssertion on partprune" thread, wherein we're
trying to fix the planner's handling of exactly such plans.)
What I'm thinking might be a more appropriate thing, at least for
getting v11 out the door, is to refuse to generate partitionwise
joins when any whole-row vars are involved. (Perhaps that's not
enough to dodge all the problems, though?)
Now, that's a bit of a problem for postgres_fdw, because it seems to
insist on injecting WRVs even when the query text does not require any.
Why is that, and can't we get rid of it? It's horrid for performance
even without any of these other considerations. But if we fail to get
rid of that in time for v11, it would mean that postgres_fdw can't
participate in PWJ, which isn't great but I think we could live with it
for now.
BTW, what exactly do we think the production status of PWJ is, anyway?
I notice that upthread it was stated that enable_partitionwise_join
defaults to off, as indeed it still does, and we'd turn it on later
when we'd gotten rid of some memory-hogging problems. If that hasn't
happened yet (and I don't see any open item about considering enabling
PWJ by default for v11), then I have exactly no hesitation about
lobotomizing PWJ as hard as we need to to mask this problem for v11.
I'd certainly prefer a solution along those lines to either of these
patches.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-08-02 20:29:36 | Re: Alter index rename concurrently to |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-08-02 20:08:28 | Re: Standby trying "restore_command" before local WAL |