> On Jan 27, 2026, at 16:55, Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I added two new test cases in 0002 that trigger the check. > > I also tested these scenarios previously. It's good that they are part > of the test suite, but they don't hit that error path. Verified with > this: > > diff --git a/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c > b/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c > index 379f4d4ebaf..50f80724cb3 100644 > --- a/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c > +++ b/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c > @@ -17857,9 +17857,7 @@ ATExecDropInherit(Relation rel, RangeVar > *parent, LOCKMODE lockmode) > Relation parent_rel; > > if (rel->rd_rel->relispartition) > - ereport(ERROR, > - (errcode(ERRCODE_WRONG_OBJECT_TYPE), > - errmsg("cannot change inheritance of a partition"))); > + Assert(0); > > /* > * AccessShareLock on the parent is probably enough, seeing that DROP
Thank you so much for pointing out this, and sorry for misunderstanding you. You are right, as the check has been added to ATPrepChangeInherit(), the same check in ATExecDropInherit becomes redundant. I thought you were talking about the check in ATPrepChangeInherit(). PFA v7: * In 0001, replaced ereport with assert in mark_index_clustered(). See my previous email for the analysis. * In 0002, removed the redundant check of relispartition from ATExecDropInherit(). Best regards, -- Chao Li (Evan) HighGo Software Co., Ltd. https://www.highgo.com/
v7-0001-tablecmds-reject-CLUSTER-ON-for-partitioned-table.patch
Description: Binary data
v7-0002-tablecmds-reject-INHERIT-NO-INHERIT-for-partition.patch
Description: Binary data
