On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
<i.kurbangaliev@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2017 21:36:11 +0900
> Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> On 2017/05/16 21:11, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
>> > <i.kurbangaliev@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>>
>> >> I agree. Maybe this issue should be added to Postgresql Open Items?
>> >> I think there should be some complex solution that fixes not only
>> >> triggers for foreign tables at table partitioning, but covers other
>> >> possible not working cases.
>>
>> > I doubt if this is an open item, since DMLs on foreign tables are
>> > supported since 9.3 and support to add foreign tables to inheritance
>> > was added back in 9.5.
>>
>> I think this issue was introduced by the latter, so that was my fault.
>>
>> One approach I came up with to fix this issue is to rewrite the
>> targetList entries of an inherited UPDATE/DELETE properly using
>> rewriteTargetListUD, when generating a plan for each child table in
>> inheritance_planner. Attached is a WIP patch for that. Maybe I am
>> missing something, though.
Could this patch include some regression tests to see at what extent
it has been tested? We surely don't want to see that broken again in
the future as well. (Nit: I did not look at the patch in details yet)
> I tested the patch, looks good.
What kind of tests did you do?
junkfilter = resultRelInfo->ri_junkFilter;
+ tupleid = NULL; estate->es_result_relation_info = resultRelInfo;
Er, what is that?
--
Michael
