| From: | Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(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> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] Fix DETACH with FK pointing to a partitioned table fails |
| Date: | 2024-08-23 02:44:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAHewXNmubkxLLCkS3D8tetbXDhCaYgdd-3UTLgE3C-HFfsHCRA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> 于2024年8月23日周五 02:41写道：
> On 2024-Aug-22, Tender Wang wrote:
>
> > I apply the v14 patch on branch REL_14_STABLE. I run this thread issue
> and I
> > find below error.
> > [...]
> > ERROR: cache lookup failed for constraint 16400
> >
> > I haven't look into details to find out where cause above error.
>
> Right, we try to drop the constraint twice. We can dodge this by
> collecting all constraints to drop in the loop and process them in a
> single performMultipleDeletions, as in the attached v14-2.
>
Can we move the CommandCounterIncrement() in
if (get_rel_relkind(fk->confrelid) == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE) block
to be close to performMultipleDeletions().
Others look good to me.
TBH I think it's a bit infuriating that we lose the constraint (which
> was explicitly declared) because of ATTACH/DETACH.
Agree.
Do you think it is friendly to users if we add hints that inform them the
constraint was dropped?
--
Tender Wang
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Guo | 2024-08-23 03:08:47 | Re: Redundant Result node |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2024-08-23 02:33:47 | Re: slru bank |