| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ilya Gladyshev <ilya(dot)v(dot)gladyshev(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables |
| Date: | 2023-03-12 20:14:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1605789.1678652046@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 03:36:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I took a look through this. It seems like basically a good solution,
>> but the count_leaf_partitions() function is bothering me, for two
>> reasons:
> ... find_all_inheritors() will also have been called by
> ProcessUtilitySlow(). Maybe it's sufficient to mention that ?
Hm. Could we get rid of count_leaf_partitions by doing the work in
ProcessUtilitySlow? Or at least passing that OID list forward instead
of recomputing it?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Attila Soki | 2023-03-12 20:36:36 | WIP Patch: pg_dump structured |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2023-03-12 20:09:57 | Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables |