Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:01 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:43 AM, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
[....]
> I have asked to change the message "tuple to be updated .." after
> heap_lock_tuple call not in nodeModifyTable.c, so please revert the
> message in nodeModifyTable.c.
>

Understood, fixed in the attached version, sorry I'd missed it.

> Have you verified the changes in execReplication.c in some way? It is
> not clear to me how do you ensure to set the special value
> (InvalidBlockNumber) in CTID for delete operation via logical
> replication? The logical replication worker uses function
> ExecSimpleRelationDelete to perform Delete and there is no way it can
> pass the correct value of row_moved in heap_delete. Am I missing
> something due to which we don't need to do this?
>

You are correct, from ExecSimpleRelationDelete, heap_delete will always
receive row_moved = false and InvalidBlockNumber will never set.

I didn't found any test case to hit changes in execReplication.c. I am not sure
what should we suppose do here, and having LOG is how much worse either.

What do you think, should we add an assert like EvalPlanQualFetch() here or
the current LOG message is fine?

Thanks for the review.

Regards,
Amul Sul