Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 202203192013.7ztcjeesrwnd@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?) (Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: a misbehavior of partition row movement (?)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-Mar-18, Zhihong Yu wrote: > +#define AFTER_TRIGGER_OFFSET 0x07FFFFFF /* must be low-order > bits */ > +#define AFTER_TRIGGER_DONE 0x80000000 > +#define AFTER_TRIGGER_IN_PROGRESS 0x40000000 > > Is it better if the order of AFTER_TRIGGER_DONE > and AFTER_TRIGGER_IN_PROGRESS is swapped (for the ordinal values to be > sequential) ? They *are* sequential -- See https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202201172215.2tse3vjjgi2b%40alvherre.pgsql > +#define AFTER_TRIGGER_CP_UPDATE 0x08000000 > > It would be better to add a comment for this constant, explaining what CP > means (cross partition). Sure. > + if (!partRel->rd_rel->relispartition) > + elog(ERROR, "cannot find ancestors of a non-partition result > relation"); > > It would be better to include the relation name in the error message. I don't think it matters. We don't really expect to hit this. > + /* Ignore the root ancestor, because ...?? */ > > Please fill out the remainder of the comment. I actually would like to know what's the rationale for this myself. Amit? > + if (!trig->tgisclone && > + RI_FKey_trigger_type(trig->tgfoid) == RI_TRIGGER_PK) > + { > + has_noncloned_fkey = true; > > The variable says fkey, but the constant is not RI_TRIGGER_FK. Maybe add a > comment explaining why. Well, the constant is about the trigger *function*, not about any constraint. This code is testing "is this a noncloned trigger, and does that trigger use an FK-related function?" If you have a favorite comment to include, I'm all ears. -- Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "It takes less than 2 seconds to get to 78% complete; that's a good sign. A few seconds later it's at 90%, but it seems to have stuck there. Did somebody make percentages logarithmic while I wasn't looking?" http://smylers.hates-software.com/2005/09/08/1995c749.html
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: