Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operationson the same table
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYki-EuLfO7SFiTW9oygHouZU2+0acZWHhSSb+inYtvfQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> In the meantime, it seems like you agree that rejecting wCTEs that
> affect tables with triggers with transition tables is the best
> response to this bug report?  Do you think that parse analysis is the
> right time to do the check?  Here's a first attempt at that.

I'm starting to like the approach of reverting the entire transition
tables patch.  Failing to consider the possibility of a plan with
multiple ModifyTable nodes seems like a pretty fundamental design
mistake, and I'm not eager either to ship this with that broken or try
to fix it at this stage of the release cycle.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: retry shm attach for windows (WAS: Re: [HACKERS] OK, so culicidae is *still* broken)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table