Thread: [HACKERS] Update comment in ExecPartitionCheck

This comment in an error handling in ExecPartitionCheck():

     if (!ExecCheck(resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheckExpr, econtext))
     {
         char       *val_desc;
         Relation    orig_rel = rel;

         /* See the comment above. */
         if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot)

should be updated because we don't have any comment on that above in the 
code.  Since we have a comment on that in ExecConstraints() defined just 
below that function, I think the comment should be something like this: 
"See the comment in ExecConstraints().".  Attached is a patch for that.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 2017/07/04 17:55, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> This comment in an error handling in ExecPartitionCheck():
> 
>     if (!ExecCheck(resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheckExpr, econtext))
>     {
>         char       *val_desc;
>         Relation    orig_rel = rel;
> 
>         /* See the comment above. */
>         if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot)
> 
> should be updated because we don't have any comment on that above in the
> code.  Since we have a comment on that in ExecConstraints() defined just
> below that function, I think the comment should be something like this:
> "See the comment in ExecConstraints().".  Attached is a patch for that.

Thanks for fixing that.  I forgot to do the same in the patch that got
committed as 15ce775faa428 [1], which moved that code block from
ExecConstraints() to ExecPartitionCheck().

Thanks,
Amit

[1]
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=15ce775faa428

On 2017/07/04 18:15, Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2017/07/04 17:55, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> This comment in an error handling in ExecPartitionCheck():
>>
>>      if (!ExecCheck(resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheckExpr, econtext))
>>      {
>>          char       *val_desc;
>>          Relation    orig_rel = rel;
>>
>>          /* See the comment above. */
>>          if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot)
>>
>> should be updated because we don't have any comment on that above in the
>> code.  Since we have a comment on that in ExecConstraints() defined just
>> below that function, I think the comment should be something like this:
>> "See the comment in ExecConstraints().".  Attached is a patch for that.
> 
> Thanks for fixing that.  I forgot to do the same in the patch that got
> committed as 15ce775faa428 [1], which moved that code block from
> ExecConstraints() to ExecPartitionCheck().

Thanks for the explanation!

In relation to this, I found odd behavior in the error handling.  Since 
that is another topic, I'll start a new thread.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:55 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> This comment in an error handling in ExecPartitionCheck():
>
>     if (!ExecCheck(resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheckExpr, econtext))
>     {
>         char       *val_desc;
>         Relation    orig_rel = rel;
>
>         /* See the comment above. */
>         if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot)
>
> should be updated because we don't have any comment on that above in the
> code.  Since we have a comment on that in ExecConstraints() defined just
> below that function, I think the comment should be something like this: "See
> the comment in ExecConstraints().".  Attached is a patch for that.

Hrm.  I'm not sure I understand which comment in ExecConstraints()
this is supposed to refer to.  Maybe we need to think a bit harder
about how to make this clear.

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

On 2017/08/26 2:28, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 4:55 AM, Etsuro Fujita
> <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> This comment in an error handling in ExecPartitionCheck():
>>
>>      if (!ExecCheck(resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheckExpr, econtext))
>>      {
>>          char       *val_desc;
>>          Relation    orig_rel = rel;
>>
>>          /* See the comment above. */
>>          if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot)
>>
>> should be updated because we don't have any comment on that above in the
>> code.  Since we have a comment on that in ExecConstraints() defined just
>> below that function, I think the comment should be something like this: "See
>> the comment in ExecConstraints().".  Attached is a patch for that.
> 
> Hrm.  I'm not sure I understand which comment in ExecConstraints()
> this is supposed to refer to.  Maybe we need to think a bit harder
> about how to make this clear.

The comment in ExecConstraints is this:

                 /*
                  * If the tuple has been routed, it's been converted to the
                  * partition's rowtype, which might differ from the root
                  * table's.  We must convert it back to the root table's
                  * rowtype so that val_desc shown error message matches the
                  * input tuple.
                  */
                 if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot)

How about replacing the comment "See the comment above." in 
ExecPartitionCheck with something like this: "If the tuple has been 
routed, convert it from the partition's rowtype to the root table's. See 
the comment in ExecConstraints().".  I think that would make it easy to 
specify that comment in ExecConstrains.  I'd like to propose to update 
the same comments in other places as well, just for consistency.

PFA an updated version of the patch.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers