Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions?
Date
Msg-id 20191111083201.GC1418@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/dependinsertions?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 11:24:46AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> A comment in heap_multi_insert() needs to be updated because it
> becomes the case with your patch:
>      /*
>       * We don't use heap_multi_insert for catalog tuples yet, but
>       * better be prepared...
>       */
>
> There is also this one in DecodeMultiInsert()
>       * CONTAINS_NEW_TUPLE will always be set currently as multi_insert
>       * isn't used for catalogs, but better be future proof.

Applying the latest patch, this results in an assertion failure for
the tests of test_decoding.

> (I am going to comment on the assertion issue on the other thread, I
> got some suggestions about it.)

This part has resulted in 75c1921, and we could just change
DecodeMultiInsert() so as if there is no tuple data then we'd just
leave.  However, I don't feel completely comfortable with that either
as it would be nice to still check that for normal relations we
*always* have a FPW available.

Daniel, your thoughts?  I am switching the patch as waiting on
author.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: dropdb --force
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId forpg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?