Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)
Date
Msg-id 202201171629.lsy5orykpjqa@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)  (Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2022-Jan-17, Zhihong Yu wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 6:26 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
> wrote:

> > On 2022-Jan-17, Amit Langote wrote:

> > The other is suggested by you:
> >
> > > Another thing to consider is that we haven't seen many reports of the
> > > problem (UPDATEs of partitioned PK tables causing DELETEs in
> > > referencing tables), even though it can be possibly very surprising to
> > > those who do run into it.
> >
> > Do nothing in the old branches.

> I think option 2, not backpatching, is more desirable at this stage.

Preliminarly, I tend to agree.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera              Valdivia, Chile  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrey Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: suboverflowed subtransactions concurrency performance optimize
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Refactoring of compression options in pg_basebackup