Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 12:29:55 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Greg Burd <greg@burd.me>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Expanding HOT updates for expression and partial indexes
Message-ID: <abg-E2beQqAS6-wk@nathan>
References: <bce13827-5f98-4d79-b779-ac5fff2b7668@app.fastmail.com>
 <c435d703af02097ec19680c2f8d4479292a3d176.camel@j-davis.com>
 <9bb9bdd6-e1fe-48fe-837d-4d0289396f1c@app.fastmail.com>
 <bed3fd08-ebfd-4980-801e-bff245a27dd7@app.fastmail.com>
 <ff2276c5-28f7-4e09-a6ae-40137ceddb67@app.fastmail.com>
 <872b875c-0aa4-4269-9c84-532227b32361@app.fastmail.com>
 <abMjC0jifWB0cs5F@nathan>
 <91f4dbe2-21ed-49f3-bebe-270f9bbec9d5@app.fastmail.com>
 <811d6f42e5481935943556b692859aae9146d4c9.camel@j-davis.com>
 <b0404aab-65a1-4922-9cff-986163ad70bb@app.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b0404aab-65a1-4922-9cff-986163ad70bb@app.fastmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/abg-E2beQqAS6-wk%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 12:23:04PM -0400, Greg Burd wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2026, at 5:11 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> Why do extra work in ExecBRUpdateTriggers() to eliminate the false
>> negative case if we don't rely on it anyway? If we do need to rely on
>> it in subsequent patches, then we need to be sure, right?
> 
> [...]
> 
> What do we "need to be sure" of?  That ExecGetAllUpdatedCols() not really
> contains all attributes that its name implies?  I think it now does that
> after 0002, do you disagree?

I'm admittedly still digging into the details, but the main question on my
mind is whether there are other cases lurking that our in-tree tests aren't
catching or that only exist in extensions.  Will there be some sort of
check or assertion to catch those?

-- 
nathan