Hi,

On 2019-02-06 10:25:56 +0000, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> >>>>> "Andres" == Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
>
>  >> Cool. Here's the patch that I, after some commit message polishing,
>  >> plan to commit to 11 and master to fix the issue at hand.
>
>  Andres> And pushed.
>
> Sorry I didn't spot this earlier, but... in the backpatch to v11, is the
> expansion of the trigger tuple really unnecessary now? Since
> heap_getattr is a macro, C-language triggers that aren't recompiled
> won't see the default? So perhaps the expansion should be left in?

There was some IRC conversation about this:

RhodiumToad | andres: ping?
RhodiumToad | n/m, sent mail
     andres | RhodiumToad: IDK, there's a lot of other heap_getattr calls, and 
most of them don't go
            | through GetTupleForTrigger(). So extensions need to be recompiled 
either way.
     andres | (I'll write that in a bit on list, in meeting now)
RhodiumToad | right, but those other calls were already broken.
RhodiumToad | whereas in a trigger, they'd have worked previously, but then 
break with your fix
       Myon | the list of packages in Debian where heap_getattr appears is 
postgresql-11, pglogical,
            | pgextwlist, citus, postgresql-plsh, wal2json, pg-cron, 
postgresql-rum
RhodiumToad | it's not an encouraged interface

I'm mildly disinclined to re-add the heap_expand_tuple, because it's not
the only case, and the extensions named above don't seem like they'd
specifically affected by the trigger path, but I'm not sure.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

Reply via email to