public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Amit Langote <[email protected]>
To: Tender Wang <[email protected]>
Cc: David Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Kirill Reshke <[email protected]>
Cc: jian he <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: BUG #19099: Conditional DELETE from partitioned table with non-updatable partition raises internal error
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 15:03:50 +0900
Message-ID: <CA+HiwqF5F8qcF195fxpgNFrYQt_oNQgj3tCm6HVxauCyKz7jxA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHewXN=Y9+ATEKniPX-KRyrkYOTWbFNSu0Yy=HAjXXwwXo6KtA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CACJufxF9FcuYe8XOuWLgWK77HCUHpOc6+7+NkktFFNmzw15jKg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHewXN=vF5d9O4R3+iUwLqEaP7pb8iYAN_e3vEE_p5sJHofn7w@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CALdSSPi7udsgQg3PUG=Z4+-9pRg8wT3HkDvTgYvtg30xNWQ9OA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALdSSPi9n2KGzKQn2Egqz3H8Nx0cgnZ8UeB5gk-KVdE3uBCj6Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+HiwqFcejrmS_H8YB-AMB7sujB7wdJXFPdAVfDC6-19FXUjgg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHewXNmx+UXg46+WUrbPca91bmVipRTpe+SRm19GtxG6mArRhg@mail.gmail.com>
<CALdSSPi6xR1tG2kLvpwNLnAjG9e0wmaY62r2_MF81ZYg5in+qQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAApHDvpYEqJ6h-3NWi_4S19RY9NARpJ3h8CRmWYbz5MJFqE-sg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+HiwqEHHTG5_TKuNw1M0dCrgUd6SauJ5dcdicz7xozMJip0SA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHewXN=Y9+ATEKniPX-KRyrkYOTWbFNSu0Yy=HAjXXwwXo6KtA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 10:01 AM Tender Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Amit Langote <[email protected]> 于2025年11月6日周四 18:00写道：
>> So for back branches, I’d propose sticking with the smaller
>> executor-side fix and perhaps revisiting the planner behavior
>> separately if we ever want to refine handling of pruned partitions or
>> dummy roots. I understand, as was reported upthread, that the EXPLAIN
>> VERBOSE output isn’t very consistent with that patch even though the
>> internal error goes away. Making sense of the output differences
>> requires knowing that the targetlist population behavior differs
>> depending on whether enable_partition_pruning is on or off as I
>> described above.
>
> The executor-side fix works for me
Thanks for checking.
> and the test case should be added to your patch.
> Should we add some comments to explain the output difference in EXPLAIN VERBOSE
> if enable_partition_pruning is set to a different value?
I added some in the v2 patch I just posted.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: BUG #19099: Conditional DELETE from partitioned table with non-updatable partition raises internal error
In-Reply-To: <CA+HiwqF5F8qcF195fxpgNFrYQt_oNQgj3tCm6HVxauCyKz7jxA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox