Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> writes: > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 09:43:56AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote: >> I want to mention that the 2nd problem I mentioned here is still broken. >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210717010259.gu20...@telsasoft.com >> It happens if non-inheritted triggers on child and parent have the same name.
> This is the fix I was proposing > It depends on pg_partition_ancestors() to return its partitions in order: > this partition => parent => ... => root. I don't think that works at all. I might be willing to accept the assumption about pg_partition_ancestors()'s behavior, but you're also making an assumption about how the output of pg_partition_ancestors() is joined to "pg_trigger AS u", and I really don't think that's safe. ISTM the real problem is the assumption that only related triggers could share a tgname, which evidently isn't true. I think this query needs to actually match on tgparentid, rather than taking shortcuts. If we don't want to use a recursive CTE, maybe we could define it as only looking up to the immediate parent, rather than necessarily finding the root? regards, tom lane