MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAHg+QDcd=t69gLf9yQexO07EJ2mx0Z70NFHo6h94X1EDA=hM0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACJufxGreOtA-S-qeHyS5iSSsj5zZX0W3Rf8FxbyL+SVXFjLYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHg+QDeGLfz8YSCChjqrxaVSrz9AnMA0NrmsNogLqeGgCt7-wg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+renyWD+XXifwswE74vhjooqbiVKu4qVhLvpMcUQBzrjVjT7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACJufxHYntqy2fo9CFWDDrqKjcMK8DGRM3kse4YnXYnPYq2Hiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+renyVp4rgj8x0ERXRkZp223eyBZ_XZr2RVCXvjzKBhTtS6Yw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACJufxEkomKYmWgqXJmQr_qS+z=BZ3w801eh7Z7ekh-3oHXxHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+renyWk7kVsZJPZKzN95mYkO7S=hDUx=+fUPtbg9qFqeepCpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACJufxHai+HB1gkNqVEHe4oKyUmXfAagWBYAWXYKy8hyMV3RxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+renyUBQdhnYxfPay+dxFs6BU1-fnEQskT0r-3dQ2v-ZnmZzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+renyVZLYSghHb_85w0pUBG0KNGKTwciFTKBK5--rpHUM+VdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <e856c439-bf96-4244-8dc3-18b2a552e406@eisentraut.org>
 <CA+renyU6rNkiNGreMyQ7pU_F6-5RND5jchHbECH4NoRO7W0Q-Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <27BD5D23-19C9-4FD1-8935-9C788C3C9869@gmail.com>
 <66C1555B-CA54-4ED1-AB4F-0EE97D24A006@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <66C1555B-CA54-4ED1-AB4F-0EE97D24A006@gmail.com>
From: Paul A Jungwirth <pj@illuminatedcomputing.com>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2026 16:26:08 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CA+renyW_rOD66MF1EAkGQ3B3GPzyRFuV0-eu53U38o0VMELjCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: FOR PORTION OF does not recompute GENERATED STORED columns that
 depend on the range column
To: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
 jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
	SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <satyanarlapuram@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BrenyW_rOD66MF1EAkGQ3B3GPzyRFuV0-eu53U38o0VMELjCA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 6, 2026 at 10:55=E2=80=AFPM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
>
> > I didn=E2=80=99t review this patch earlier because, from the subject, I=
 thought it was only about recomputing generated stored columns. I just not=
iced that the patch also changes the inheritance-table path, and I posted a=
nother patch for the inheritance-table bug. Please see [1].
> >
> > I tried applying the new tests from my patch on top of this patch, and =
it looks like this patch still does not fix the multi-inheritance case.
> >
> > So I=E2=80=99d like to check with you how we should proceed. I think th=
ere are two options:
> >
> > 1. Keep this patch focused on the generated-column issue described in t=
he subject, and use my patch to fix the inheritance-table bug.
> > 2. I can continue from this patch and extend it to fix the multi-inheri=
tance case as well.
> >
> > Please let me know what you prefer.

Thanks for your help on this! I agree that separating the patches
would be better.

> I just looked into v9 and made a fix in ExecInitForPortionOf() that resol=
ves the bug with multi-inheritance tables. I also added a test case for tha=
t.
>
> The inheritance-table bug affects not only UPDATE, but also DELETE, so I =
added test cases for DELETE as well. Please see 0002 for my changes.
>
> To make each commit self-contained, would you mind moving the code for th=
e inheritance-table fix to 0002? Then you can keep focusing on 0001, and I =
can continue working on 0002.
>
> PFA v10 - 0001 the same as v9. 0002 fixed a bug with multi-inheritance ta=
bles.

I'll post a v11 addressing the feedback in your other email and moving
the fixes for partitions/inheritance.

Yours,

--
Paul              ~{:-)
pj@illuminatedcomputing.com