On 2017/09/12 19:56, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > I think the code here expects the original parent_rte and not the one > we set around line 1169. > > This isn't a bug right now, since both the parent_rte s have same > content. But I am not sure if that will remain to be so. Here's patch > to fix the thinko.
Instead of the new bool is_parent_partitioned, why not move the code to set partitioned_rels to the block where you're now setting is_parent_partitioned. Also, since we know this isn't a bug at the moment but will turn into one once we have step-wise expansion, why not include this fix in that patch itself? Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
