Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE ofpartition key
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE ofpartition key |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20180407201959.76zbie3m5ay6o3u5@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE ofpartition key (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-04-06 09:41:07 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > >> Won't the same question applies to the similar usage in > >> EvalPlanQualFetch and heap_lock_updated_tuple_rec. > > > > I don't think so? > > > > > >> In EvalPlanQualFetch, we consider such a tuple to be deleted and will > >> silently miss/skip it which seems contradictory to the places where we > >> have detected such a situation and raised an error. > > > > if (ItemPointerIndicatesMovedPartitions(&hufd.ctid)) > > ereport(ERROR, > > (errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE), > > errmsg("tuple to be locked was already moved to another partition due to concurrent update"))); > > > > > > I was talking about the case when the tuple version is not visible aka > the below code: > I think if we return an error in EvalPlanQualFetch at the place > mentioned above, the behavior will be sane. I think you're right. I've adapted the code, added a bunch of tests. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: