Re: [BUGS] Problem with declarative partitioning and COPY FROM
От | Amit Langote |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] Problem with declarative partitioning and COPY FROM |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+HiwqH8movQjdRM=eSfAAppTMJqvbZPgF234s3WfS3q8rW+oQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] Problem with declarative partitioning and COPY FROM (Ragnar Ouchterlony <ragnar.ouchterlony@agama.tv>) |
Ответы |
Re: [BUGS] Problem with declarative partitioning and COPY FROM
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Ragnar Ouchterlony <ragnar.ouchterlony@agama.tv> wrote: > On 2017-01-11 13:24, Amit Langote wrote: >> >> There's a bug and has been reported on the -hackers mailing list as >> well. Please try your example after applying the patch 0002 attached >> with the following email: >> >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/01bc4745-bac8-a033-96a1-8a42b45d2fc1%40lab.ntt.co.jp > > > Ok, that is good! > > I tested the patch as is, but it did not make a difference. Then I read the > patch more carefully. > > + /* > + * FIXME: We don't engage the bulk-insert mode for partitioned > tables, > + * because the the heap relation is most likely change from one row > to > + * next due to tuple-routing. > + */ > + if (cstate->rel->rd_rel->relkind == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE) > + bistate = GetBulkInsertState(); > > > The if-statement does not match how I read the comment. That is, shouldn't > it be "!=" rather than "=="? Oops, you're right. Will update the patch posted on -hackers. Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: