From: | Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: handling multiple matching constraints in DetachPartitionFinalize() |
Date: | 2022-08-23 18:11:20 |
Message-ID: | CALNJ-vSBDzXfj-OU9g-HdquGCW0UoMRsyqR4LD7T-Y7ir9oNBQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 10:53 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
wrote:
> On 2022-Aug-23, Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
> > This is what I came up with.
>
> I suggest you provide a set of SQL commands that provoke some wrong
> behavior with the original code, and show that they generate good
> behavior after the patch. Otherwise, it's hard to evaluate the
> usefulness of this.
>
> --
> Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland —
> https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
> "Puedes vivir sólo una vez, pero si lo haces bien, una vez es suficiente"
>
Toggling enable_seqscan on / off using the example from `parenting a PK
constraint to a self-FK one` thread, it can be shown that different
constraint Id would be detached which is incorrect.
However, I am not sure whether toggling enable_seqscan mid-test is
legitimate.
Cheers
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nikita Glukhov | 2022-08-23 18:16:24 | Re: SQL/JSON features for v15 |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-08-23 18:10:59 | Re: SQL/JSON features for v15 |