Re: problems with foreign keys on partitioned tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: problems with foreign keys on partitioned tables
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqF43JQBHKSrfxn846rVb1ycZfnsRakTT9rLhVj=WzGyNw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: problems with foreign keys on partitioned tables  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: problems with foreign keys on partitioned tables  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 7:16 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Thanks, this is better.  There were a few other things I didn't like, so
> I updated it.  Mostly, two things:
>
> 1. I didn't like a seqscan on pg_trigger, so I turned that into an
> indexed scan on the constraint OID, and then the other two conditions
> are checked in the returned tuples.  Also, what's the point on
> duplicating code and checking how many you deleted?  Just delete them
> all.

Yeah, I didn't quite like what that code looked like, but it didn't
occur to me that there's an index on tgconstraint.

It looks much better now.

> 2. I didn't like the ABI break, and it wasn't necessary: you can just
> call createForeignKeyActionTriggers directly.  That's much simpler.

OK.

> I also added tests.  While running them, I noticed that my previous
> commit was broken in terms of relcache invalidation.  I don't really
> know if this is a new problem with that commit, or an existing one.  The
> fix is 0001.

Looks good.

Thanks,
Amit


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sergei Kornilov
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: Query with high planning time at version 11.1 compared versions10.5 and 11.0