Hi Amit,
On 8/9/21 10:37 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 12:22 PM Drouvot, Bertrand <bdrouvot@amazon.com> wrote:
>> Please find enclosed a patch proposal to:
>>
>> * Avoid the failed assertion on current master and generate the error message instead (should the code reach that
stage).
>> * Reset the toast_hash in case of relation rewrite with toast (so that the logical decoding in the above repro is
working).
>>
> I think instead of resetting toast_hash for this case why don't we set
> 'relrewrite' for toast tables as well during rewrite? If we do that
> then we will simply skip assembling toast chunks for the toast table.
Thanks for looking at it!
I do agree, that would be even better than the current patch approach:
I'll work on it.
> In make_new_heap(), we are calling NewHeapCreateToastTable() to create
> toast table where we can pass additional information (probably
> 'toastid'), if required to set 'relrewrite'. Additionally, let's add a
> test case if possible for this.
+ 1 for the test case, it will be added in the next version of the patch.
>
> BTW, I see this as an Open Item for PG-14 [1] which seems wrong to me
> as this is a bug from previous versions. I am not sure who added it
Me neither.
> but do you see any reason for this to consider as an open item for
> PG-14?
No, I don't see any reasons as this is a bug from previous versions.
Thanks
Bertrand
