Don't needlessly check the partition contraint twice

Starting with commit f0e44751d717, ExecConstraints was in charge of
running the partition constraint; commit 19c47e7c8202 modified that so
that caller could request to skip that checking depending on some
conditions, but that commit and 15ce775faa42 together introduced a small
bug there which caused ExecInsert to request skipping the constraint
check but have this not be honored -- in effect doing the check twice.
This could have been fixed in a very small patch, but on further
analysis of the involved function and its callsites, it turns out to be
simpler to give the responsibility of checking the partition constraint
fully to the caller, and return ExecConstraints to its original
(pre-partitioning) shape where it only checked tuple descriptor-related
constraints.  Each caller must do partition constraint checking on its
own schedule, which is more convenient after commit 2f178441044 anyway.

Reported-by: David Rowley
Author: David Rowley, Álvaro Herrera
Reviewed-by: Amit Langote, Amit Khandekar, Simon Riggs
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAKJS1f8w8+awsxgea8wt7_UX8qzOQ=Tm1LD+U1fHqBAkXxkW2w@mail.gmail.com

1 files changed, 15 insertions, 21 deletions

diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2a4dfea1511..7e0b8679717 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -365,16 +365,6 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
 	else
 	{
 		WCOKind		wco_kind;
-		bool		check_partition_constr;
-
-		/*
-		 * We always check the partition constraint, including when the tuple
-		 * got here via tuple-routing.  However we don't need to in the latter
-		 * case if no BR trigger is defined on the partition.  Note that a BR
-		 * trigger might modify the tuple such that the partition constraint
-		 * is no longer satisfied, so we need to check in that case.
-		 */
-		check_partition_constr = (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheck != NIL);
 
 		/*
 		 * Constraints might reference the tableoid column, so initialize
@@ -402,17 +392,21 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
 			ExecWithCheckOptions(wco_kind, resultRelInfo, slot, estate);
 
 		/*
-		 * No need though if the tuple has been routed, and a BR trigger
-		 * doesn't exist.
+		 * Check the constraints of the tuple.
 		 */
-		if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot != NULL &&
-			!(resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc &&
-			  resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc->trig_insert_before_row))
-			check_partition_constr = false;
+		if (resultRelationDesc->rd_att->constr)
+			ExecConstraints(resultRelInfo, slot, estate);
 
-		/* Check the constraints of the tuple */
-		if (resultRelationDesc->rd_att->constr || check_partition_constr)
-			ExecConstraints(resultRelInfo, slot, estate, true);
+		/*
+		 * Also check the tuple against the partition constraint, if there is
+		 * one; except that if we got here via tuple-routing, we don't need to
+		 * if there's no BR trigger defined on the partition.
+		 */
+		if (resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheck &&
+			(resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot == NULL ||
+			 (resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc &&
+			  resultRelInfo->ri_TrigDesc->trig_insert_before_row)))
+			ExecPartitionCheck(resultRelInfo, slot, estate, true);
 
 		if (onconflict != ONCONFLICT_NONE && resultRelInfo->ri_NumIndices > 0)
 		{
@@ -1037,7 +1031,7 @@ lreplace:;
 		 */
 		partition_constraint_failed =
 			resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionCheck &&
-			!ExecPartitionCheck(resultRelInfo, slot, estate);
+			!ExecPartitionCheck(resultRelInfo, slot, estate, false);
 
 		if (!partition_constraint_failed &&
 			resultRelInfo->ri_WithCheckOptions != NIL)
@@ -1168,7 +1162,7 @@ lreplace:;
 		 * have it validate all remaining checks.
 		 */
 		if (resultRelationDesc->rd_att->constr)
-			ExecConstraints(resultRelInfo, slot, estate, false);
+			ExecConstraints(resultRelInfo, slot, estate);
 
 		/*
 		 * replace the heap tuple