On Tue, Mar 17, 2026, at 12:38 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 2026-03-16 at 16:51 -0400, Greg Burd wrote:
>> > Also, the "actually changed values" is only valid for a single
>> > tuple,
>> > and it would be good to clarify that and make sure there's not a
>> > lot of
>> > room for confusion there.
>>
>> Yes, that's true... too much confusion and not enough juice for the
>> squeeze. I'm dropping that.
>
> That is an interesting case you found in that the columns targeted by
> an update are not a superset of the columns with actually changed
> values. But I'm not sure exactly what to make of that fact, and if it's
> not important for your other changes then I agree that we should drop
> it.
>
> However, it might be good to comment somewhere that your changes (which
> are based on values in specific tuples) cannot rely on
> ExecGetAllUpdatedCols(), to avoid confusion in the future.
Fair point, I'll do that.
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
v37 attached with changes you and Nathan asked for so far. More please! :)
thanks Jeff and Nathan!
best.
-greg
