From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: partition tree inspection functions |
Date: | 2018-10-01 06:03:30 |
Message-ID: | 20181001060330.GJ5982@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:05:56PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Attached updated patch.
So, except if I am missing something, what we have here is a patch which
has been debatted quite a bit and has semantics which look nice. Any
objections if we move forward with this patch?
+-- all tables in the tree
+select *, pg_relation_size(relid) as size from
pg_partition_children('ptif_test');
+ relid | parentid | level | isleaf | size
+-------------+------------+-------+--------+-------
+ ptif_test | | 0 | f | 0
+ ptif_test0 | ptif_test | 1 | f | 0
+ ptif_test1 | ptif_test | 1 | f | 0
+ ptif_test2 | ptif_test | 1 | t | 16384
+ ptif_test01 | ptif_test0 | 2 | t | 24576
One thing is that this test depends on the page size. There are already
plan modifications if running the regress tests with a size other than
8kB, but I don't think that we should make that worse, so I would
suggest to replace to use "pg_relation_size(relid) > 0" instead.
I have moved the patch to next CF for now.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2018-10-01 06:16:32 | Re: partition tree inspection functions |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-10-01 05:57:09 | Re: ToDo: show size of partitioned table |