Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables
Date: 2018-02-28 16:03:57
Message-ID: CA+TgmoadhRyEYqv52Yb6nAN_cuzzaEX_utwQXhB7XWhcirYCUA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I updated Amit Langote's patch for INSERT ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE[1].
> Following the lead of edd44738bc88 ("Be lazier about partition tuple
> routing.") this incarnation only does the necessary push-ups for the
> specific partition that needs it, at execution time. As far as I can
> tell, it works as intended.
>
> I chose to refuse the case where the DO UPDATE clause causes the tuple
> to move to another partition (i.e. you're updating the partition key of
> the tuple). While it's probably possible to implement that, it doesn't
> seem a very productive use of time.

I would have thought that to be the only case we could support with
the current infrastructure. Doesn't a correct implementation for any
other case require a global index?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2018-02-28 16:49:01 Re: Registering LWTRANCHE_PARALLEL_HASH_JOIN
Previous Message Anastasia Lubennikova 2018-02-28 16:03:11 Reduce amount of WAL generated by CREATE INDEX for gist, gin and sp-gist