| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees |
| Date: | 2018-07-03 07:05:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20180703070551.GC11732@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 03:49:44PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> I forgot that expand_partitioned_rtentry() will recursively call itself if
> a partition is itself a partitioned table, in which case the above
> code helps.
Actually look at the coverage reports:
https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/optimizer/prep/prepunion.c.gcov.html
1742 : /*
1743 : * If the partitioned table has no partitions or all the partitions are
1744 : * temporary tables from other backends, treat this as non-inheritance
1745 : * case.
1746 : */
1747 4920 : if (!has_child)
1748 0 : parentrte->inh = false;
1749 4920 : }
expand_partitioned_rtentry() never disables this flag on recursive calls
with a multi-level tree. Could it be possible to get a test which
closes the gap?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2018-07-03 08:49:11 | Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-07-03 06:49:44 | Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-07-03 07:06:45 | Pluggable Storage - Andres's take |
| Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-07-03 07:03:07 | Unusable index |