Re: Concurrency bug in UPDATE of partition-key

From: Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Concurrency bug in UPDATE of partition-key
Date: 2018-07-11 04:34:29
Message-ID: CAJ3gD9eJvrn7o-y1ECfHTHUpxTV-RcUP5jEu5sNw4MT9ohTLcQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11 July 2018 at 09:48, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:59 AM, Alvaro Herrera
>>
>>
>>> Please move the output arguments at the end of argument lists;
>>
>> make sense.
>>
>>> also, it
>>> would be great if you add commentary about ExecDelete other undocumented
>>> arguments (tupleDeleted in particular) while you're in the vicinity.
>>>
>>
>> We already have some commentary in the caller of ExecDelete ("For some
>> reason if DELETE didn't happen ..."), but I think it will be clear if
>> we can add some comments atop function ExecDelete. I will send the
>> updated patch shortly.
>>
>
> Attached, please find an updated patch based on comments by Alvaro.
> See, if this looks okay to you guys.

Thanks for the patch. It looks good to me.

-Amit Khandekar
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2018-07-11 04:34:47 Re: no partition pruning when partitioning using array type
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2018-07-11 04:18:59 Re: Concurrency bug in UPDATE of partition-key