Re: result relation used anymore?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: result relation used anymore? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6033.1046463439@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | result relation used anymore? (Brandon Craig Rhodes <brandon@oit.gatech.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Brandon Craig Rhodes <brandon@oit.gatech.edu> writes: > While learning how to read query trees, I have been puzzled by the > assertion in the manual that the :resultRelations of an INSERT holds > `the table (or view!) where the changes take effect,' because in all > of the INSERTs I have generated the resultRelation in fact appears > empty, You seem to be confusing resultRelation with resultRelations. The documentation is speaking of the former. Of the latter, parsenodes.h says /* * If the resultRelation turns out to be the parent of an inheritance * tree, the planner will add all the childtables to the rtable and * store a list of the rtindexes of all the result relations here. * This is done at plantime, not parse time, since we don't want to * commit to the exact set of child tables at parse time. This field * ought to go in some sort of TopPlan plan node, not in the Query. */ List *resultRelations; /* integerlist of RT indexes, or NIL */ Note in particular that this only gets set when the target is an inheritance tree --- which, by definition, it never is for INSERT. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: