Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables
Date: 2018-03-16 18:33:56
Message-ID: CAH2-WzmMSyzP08mEKZ5qCM2oPu74a4z1qqQ+_Fk=8huerqODfQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> So ExecInsert receives the ModifyTableState, and separately it receives
> arbiterIndexes and the OnConflictAction, both of which are members of
> the passed ModifyTableState. I wonder why does it do that; wouldn't it
> be simpler to extract those members from the node?

> Or is there another reason to pass the index list?

It works that way pretty much by accident, as far as I can tell.
Removing the two extra arguments sounds like a good idea.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2018-03-16 18:54:27 Update doc links to https where appropriate?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-03-16 18:21:06 Re: ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE for partitioned tables