From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Test for trigger condition accessing system attributes |
Date: | 2018-07-10 13:19:30 |
Message-ID: | CAFjFpReJUZdw+nM-3umNpEJFPBDhsMBH=iAc=ehQK4mcbN_5Mw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks Heikki.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> On 10/05/18 11:58, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I was investigating the cases when the system attributes are accessed
>> beyond the scans. After investigating set_plan_references(), I thought
>> that we never access system attributes beyond scans. This lead me to
>> assume that EEOP_INNER/OUTER_SYSVAR are not needed since we do not
>> access system attributes from an inner or outer slot. I removed the
>> defintions and code using those and ran regression. All the tests
>> passed. So, I was about to conclude that my assumption is correct. But
>> then looking at TriggerEnabled() I realised that we also (ab?)use
>> INNER/OUTER Vars for OLD/NEW tuples for trigger condition. If the WHEN
>> condition in CREATE TRIGGER command refers to a system attribute, we
>> will end up having INNER/OUTER var refering a system attribute, thus
>> exercising code for EEOP_INNER/OUTER_SYSVAR.
>>
>> Here's patch containing a testcase exercizing that code using
>> EEOP_INNER/OUTER_SYSVAR.
>
>
> Pushed with some small changes. Thanks!
>
> - Heikki
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lars Kanis | 2018-07-10 13:22:10 | Re: Retrieve memory size allocated by libpq |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2018-07-10 13:17:50 | Re: Test for trigger condition accessing system attributes |