Re: pgsql: Improve handling of inherited GENERATED expressions. - Mailing list pgsql-committers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: pgsql: Improve handling of inherited GENERATED expressions.
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqFoaxUs2pYao7MWLh1_WpgWK_is8wcrQHT+6JDwf7jN1Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql: Improve handling of inherited GENERATED expressions.  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: pgsql: Improve handling of inherited GENERATED expressions.  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-committers
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 7:52 PM Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> On 2023-01-11 We 15:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Improve handling of inherited GENERATED expressions.
> >
> > In both partitioning and traditional inheritance, require child
> > columns to be GENERATED if and only if their parent(s) are.
> > Formerly we allowed the case of an inherited column being
> > GENERATED when its parent isn't, but that results in inconsistent
> > behavior: the column can be directly updated through an UPDATE
> > on the parent table, leading to it containing a user-supplied
> > value that might not match the generation expression.  This also
> > fixes an oversight that we enforced partition-key-columns-can't-
> > be-GENERATED against parent tables, but not against child tables
> > that were dynamically attached to them.
> >
> > Also, remove the restriction that the child's generation expression
> > be equivalent to the parent's.  In the wake of commit 3f7836ff6,
> > there doesn't seem to be any reason that we need that restriction,
> > since generation expressions are always computed per-table anyway.
> > By removing this, we can also allow a child to merge multiple
> > inheritance parents with inconsistent generation expressions, by
> > overriding them with its own expression, much as we've long allowed
> > for DEFAULT expressions.
> >
> > Since we're rejecting a case that we used to accept, this doesn't
> > seem like a back-patchable change.  Given the lack of field
> > complaints about the inconsistent behavior, it's likely that no
> > one is doing this anyway, but we won't change it in minor releases.
>
>
> This appears to have caused a problem with cross-version upgrade. It's
> not showing on the uploaded buildfarm logs (I will fix that) but the
> error from crake is this:
>
> pg_restore: while PROCESSING TOC:
>
> pg_restore: from TOC entry 424; 1259 25257 TABLE gtest_normal_child buildfarm
>
> pg_restore: error: could not execute query: ERROR:  column "b" in child table must not be a generated column
>
> Command was:
>
> -- For binary upgrade, must preserve pg_type oid
>
> SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_set_next_pg_type_oid('25259'::pg_catalog.oid);
>
> -- For binary upgrade, must preserve pg_type array oid
>
> SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_set_next_array_pg_type_oid('25258'::pg_catalog.oid);
>
> -- For binary upgrade, must preserve pg_class oids and relfilenodes
>
> SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_set_next_heap_pg_class_oid('25257'::pg_catalog.oid);
>
> SELECT pg_catalog.binary_upgrade_set_next_heap_relfilenode('25257'::pg_catalog.oid);
>
> CREATE TABLE "public"."gtest_normal_child" (
>
>     "a" integer,
>
>     "b" integer GENERATED ALWAYS AS (("a" * 2)) STORED
>
> );
>
> -- For binary upgrade, set up inheritance this way.
>
> ALTER TABLE ONLY "public"."gtest_normal_child" INHERIT "public"."gtest_normal";

IIUC, by deciding to not back-patch this, we're expecting the user to
fix any child tables in the old cluster that have unsupported (in v16)
properties before upgrading to v16, right?  If that is indeed the
case, maybe this is again a case where TestUpgradeXversion.pm needs
tweaking?

-- 
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-committers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Sample postgres_fdw tables remotely during ANALYZE
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Improve handling of inherited GENERATED expressions.