Re: partition tree inspection functions

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 06:27:43
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 03:16:32PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> I wasn't able to respond to some of issues that Jesper brought up with the
> approach taken by the latest patch whereby there is no separate
> pg_partition_level function. He said that such a function would be useful
> to get the information about the individual leaf partitions, but I was no
> longer sure of providing such a function separately.

Perhaps that could be debated separately as well? From what I can see
what's available would unlock the psql patch which would like to add
support for \dP, or show the size of partitions more easily. I am also
not completely sure that I see the use-case for pg_partition_level or
even pg_partition_root_parent as usually in their schemas users append
rather similar relation names to the parent and the children. Or
perhaps not?

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-10-01 06:30:06 Re: Sample values for pg_stat_statements
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-10-01 06:19:17 Re: libpq should append auth failures, not overwrite