On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 06:01:12PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-Jul-16, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > CREATE TABLE p(i int) PARTITION BY RANGE(i); > > CREATE TABLE p1 PARTITION OF p FOR VALUES FROM (1)TO(2); > > CREATE FUNCTION foo() returns trigger LANGUAGE plpgsql AS $$begin end$$; > > CREATE TRIGGER x AFTER DELETE ON p1 EXECUTE FUNCTION foo(); > > CREATE TRIGGER x AFTER DELETE ON p EXECUTE FUNCTION foo(); > > Hmm, interesting -- those statement triggers are not cloned, so what is > going on here is just that the psql query to show them is tripping on > its shoelaces ... I'll try to find a fix. > > I *think* the problem is that the query matches triggers by name and > parent/child relationship; we're missing to ignore triggers by tgtype. > It's not great design that tgtype is a bitmask of unrelated flags ...
I see it's the subquery Amit wrote and proposed here: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+HiwqEiMe0tCOoPOwjQrdH5fxnZccMR7oeW=f9fmgszjqb...@mail.gmail.com .. and I realize that I've accidentally succeeded in breaking what I first attempted to break 15 months ago: On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 02:57:40PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > I'm happy to see that this doesn't require a recursive cte, at least. > I was trying to think how to break it by returning multiple results or results > out of order, but I think that can't happen. If you assume that pg_partition_ancestors returns its results in order, I think you can fix it by adding LIMIT 1. Otherwise I think you need a recursive CTE, as I'd feared. Note also that I'd sent a patch to add newlines, to make psql -E look pretty. v6-0001-fixups-c33869cc3bfc42bce822251f2fa1a2a346f86cc5.patch -- Justin
