Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Maksim Milyutin <milyutinma(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
Date: 2018-01-18 15:56:25
Message-ID: 20180118155625.npteaei5gdcv6ngl@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 1/11/18 13:52, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > The delta patch turned out to have at least one stupid bug, and a few
> > non-stupid bugs. Here's an updated version that should behave
> > correctly, and addresses all reported problems.
> It seems that CompareIndexInfo() still doesn't compare indexes' operator
> classes and collations.
> Also, some new test cases for pg_dump would be nice.

Fixed CompareIndexInfo to compare collations and opfamilies; also added
tests about that.

I think I fixed all the items David reported too, including rewording
the error message to Robert's suggestion. (One thing remaining is the
int16 used in StoreCatalogInheritance1 signature.)

pg_dump tests are still missing here, but I think this version is good
enough step forward. I'll add a few tests for pg_dump, and see about
getting this pushed early tomorrow.

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
v14-0001-Local-partitioned-indexes.patch text/plain 192.7 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Antonin Houska 2018-01-18 16:06:52 Re: Unnecessary static variable?
Previous Message Antonin Houska 2018-01-18 15:54:09 Re: [HACKERS] Possible gaps/garbage in the output of XLOG reader