From: | Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Baehler Thomas SBB CFF FFS <thomas(dot)baehler2(at)sbb(dot)ch>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Subject: | Re: [BUG] Fix DETACH with FK pointing to a partitioned table fails |
Date: | 2024-09-03 09:55:12 |
Message-ID: | CAHewXNmoQrZNksK34edz=QnqZ-4N3_wxbcWTM1cKmS6t3jZ7og@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> 于2024年9月3日周二 17:26写道:
> Hi Tender,
>
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2024 10:16:44 +0800
> Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com> 于2024年9月3日周二 05:02写道:
> […]
> > > * Constraint & trigger catalog cleanup [1] (this thread)
> > > * FK broken after DETACH [2]
> > > * Maintenance consideration about self referencing FK between
> partitions
> > > [3]
> > >
> >
> > The third issue has been fixed, and codes have been pushed. Because of
> my
> > misunderstanding,
> > It should not be here.
>
> I just retried the SQL scenario Guillaume gave on both master and master
> with
> Alvaro's patch. See:
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAECtzeWHCA%2B6tTcm2Oh2%2Bg7fURUJpLZb-%3DpRXgeWJ-Pi%2BVU%3D_w%40mail.gmail.com
>
> It doesn't seem fixed at all. Maybe you are mixing up with another
> thread/issue?
>
Sorry, I mixed up the third issue with the Alexander reported issue.
Please ignore the above noise.
>
> > > 0. Splitting in two commits
> > >
> > > […]
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, this discussion about the first bug slipped to the
> second
> > > one when Tender stumbled on this bug as well and reported it. But,
> both
> > > bugs can be triggered independently, and have distinct fixes.
> >
> > It's ok that these two issues are fixed together. It is because current
> > codes don't handle better when the referenced side is the partition
> table.
>
> I don't feel the same. Mixing two discussions and fixes together in the
> same
> thread and commit makes life harder.
>
Hmm, these two issues have a close relationship. Anyway, I think it's ok to
fix the two issues together.
> Last year, when you found the other bug, I tried to point you to the
> right thread to avoid mixing subjects:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230810170345.26e41b05%40karst
>
> If I wrote about the third (non fixed) issue yesterday, it's just because
> Alvaro included a reference to it in his commit message. But I think we
> should
> really keep up with this issue on its own, dedicated discussion:
>
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAECtzeWHCA%2B6tTcm2Oh2%2Bg7fURUJpLZb-%3DpRXgeWJ-Pi%2BVU%3D_w%40mail.gmail.com
Thanks for the reminder. I didn't take the time to look into the third
issue. Please give me some to analyze it.
--
Thanks,
Tender Wang
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2024-09-03 10:00:13 | Re: Typos in the code and README |
Previous Message | Andrei Lepikhov | 2024-09-03 09:52:55 | Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes |