From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, ahsan(dot)hadi(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ERROR: "ft1" is of the wrong type. |
Date: | 2021-07-14 10:55:18 |
Message-ID: | YO7ClmoiK0zTeNBI@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 09:00:31PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Mmm. Ok, I distributed the mother regression test into each version.
Thanks, my apologies for the late reply. It took me some time to
analyze the whole.
> PG11, 12:
>
> - ATT_TABLE | ATT_PARTITIONED_INDEX
>
> This test doesn't detect the "is of the wrong type" issue.
>
> The item is practically a dead one since the combination is caught
> by transformPartitionCmd before visiting ATPrepCmd, which emits a
> bit different error message for the test.
Yes, I was surprised to see this test choke in the utility parsing.
There is a good argument in keeping (ATT_TABLE |
ATT_PARTITIONED_INDEX) though. I analyzed the code and I agree that
it cannot be directly reached, but a future code change on those
branches may expose that. And it does not really cost in keeping it
either.
> PG13:
> Of course this works fine but doesn't seem clean, but it is
> apparently a matter of the master branch.
>
> - ATT_TABLE | ATT_MATVIEW | ATT_INDEX | ATT_PARTITIONED_INDEX | ATT_FOREIGN_TABLE
> Added and works as expected.
HEAD had its own improvements, and what you have here closes some
holes of their own, so applied. Thanks!
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2021-07-14 11:00:30 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
Previous Message | vignesh C | 2021-07-14 10:37:21 | Re: Added schema level support for publication. |