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 202201190925.rrnex5zf56vz@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2022-Jan-19, Amit Langote wrote:

> BTW, your tweaks patch added this:
> 
> + *     *inserted_tuple is the tuple that's effectively inserted;
> + *     *inserted_destrel is the relation where it was inserted.
> + *     These are only set on success.  FIXME -- see what happens on
> the "do nothing" cases.
> 
> If by "do nothing cases" you mean INSERT ON CONFLICT ... DO NOTHING,
> then I don't think it matters, because the caller in that case would
> be ExecModifyTable() which doesn't care about inserted_tuple and
> inserted_destrel.

No, I meant a FOR EACH ROW trigger that does RETURN NULL to "abort" the
insertion.  IIRC in non-partitioned cases it is possibly to break
referential integrity by using those.  What I was wondering is whether
you can make this new code crash.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera              Valdivia, Chile  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"I can see support will not be a problem.  10 out of 10."    (Simon Wittber)
      (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2004-12/msg00159.php)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend
Next
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: WIN32 pg_import_system_collations