On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 5:34 PM Amit Langote <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 10:12 PM Amit Langote <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 12:09 AM Noah Misch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 10:42:14PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > > > > After considering Peter's report of another bug [1] that is fixed by > > > > 0001, I tested both his reproducer and nested firing involving the > > > > same constraint. > > > > > > > > The latter exposed a problem in v1: the cache was still keyed only by > > > > constraint OID, so a nested check of the same constraint reused the > > > > outer entry and did not register a callback at the nested query depth. > > > > In v2, the key is now (constraint OID, query depth), giving each > > > > firing level its own entry and callback. > > > > > > > > 0001 now includes regression tests for both cases. 0002 and 0003 are > > > > unchanged. > > > > > > > > I would like to commit these sometime this week and would appreciate a > > > > review. > > > > > > I won't be able to review this. The list should consider it up for grabs. > > > > Attached is v3, rebased over latest master. > > > > I reorganized the series to separate firing-state restoration (0001), > > per-firing-cycle batch and callback scoping that fixes Peter's report > > [1] (0002), and per-subtransaction batch tracking as suggested by Noah > > (0003). 0003 also folds in the invariant assertion previously sent > > separately. The combined code is otherwise unchanged from v2. > > > > [1] > > https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wz%3DD533JbF_ak_Pc8kP0FKse-ju8DnMxtjvY%3D%3DyHsP4xgw%40mail.gmail.com > > I've now pushed 0001 and 0002. Since they fix live bugs, I decided to > commit them sooner rather than later. > > I plan to commit the attached remaining patch tomorrow, barring > objections, and then close this item.
Pushed and closed the item. -- Thanks, Amit Langote
