Re: Odd behavior in foreign table modification (Was: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW)
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Odd behavior in foreign table modification (Was: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 56A0AAF5.6040406@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Odd behavior in foreign table modification (Was: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW) (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016/01/19 19:04, Thom Brown wrote: > On 12 January 2016 at 11:49, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> On 2016/01/12 20:36, Thom Brown wrote: >>> On 8 January 2016 at 05:08, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> >>> wrote: >>>>> On 2016/01/06 20:37, Thom Brown wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I've run into an issue: >>>>>> >>>>>> *# UPDATE master_customers SET id = 22 WHERE id = 16 RETURNING >>>>>> tableoid::regclass; >>>>>> ERROR: >>>>>> CONTEXT: Remote SQL command: UPDATE public.customers SET id = 22 >>>>>> WHERE ((id = 16)) RETURNING NULL >>>> While working on this, I noticed that the existing postgres_fdw system >>>> shows >>>> similar behavior, so I changed the subject. >>>> >>>> IIUC, the reason for that is when the local query specifies "RETURNING >>>> tableoid::regclass", the FDW has fmstate->has_returning=false while the >>>> remote query executed at ModifyTable has "RETURNING NULL", as shown in >>>> the >>>> above example; that would cause an abnormal exit in executing the remote >>>> query in postgresExecForeignUpdate, since that the FDW would get >>>> PGRES_TUPLES_OK as a result of the query while the FDW would think that >>>> the >>>> right result to get should be PGRES_COMMAND_OK, from the flag >>>> fmstate->has_returning=false. >>>> Attached is a patch to fix that. >>> I can't apply this patch in tandem with FDW DML pushdown patch (either >>> v2 or v3). >> That patch is for fixing the similar issue in the existing postgres_fdw >> system. So, please apply that patch without the DML pushdown patch. If >> that patch is reasonable as a fix for the issue, I'll update the DML >> pushdown patch (v3) on top of that patch. > The patch seems to work for me: > > Before: > > *# UPDATE master_customers SET id = 22 WHERE id = 1 RETURNING > tableoid::regclass; > ERROR: > CONTEXT: Remote SQL command: UPDATE public.customers SET id = $2 > WHERE ctid = $1 RETURNING NULL > > After: > > *# UPDATE master_customers SET id = 22 WHERE id = 1 RETURNING > tableoid::regclass; > tableoid > ------------------ > remote.customers > (1 row) > > UPDATE 1 Thanks for the testing! I updated the DML pushdown patch on top of Robert's version of this bugfix patch. Please see http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/56A0A9F0.9090304@lab.ntt.co.jp Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: