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: Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(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: 2018-10-19 07:47:29
Message-ID: 20181019074729.GF2099@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 01:05:52PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> As I said above, the price of removing relhassubclass might be a bit
> steep. So, the other alternative I mentioned before is to set
> relhassubclass correctly even for indexes if only for pg_partition_tree to
> be able to use find_inheritance_children unchanged.

Playing devil's advocate a bit more... Another alternative here would
be to remove the fast path using relhassubclass from
find_inheritance_children and instead have its callers check for it :)

Anyway, it seems that you are right here. Just setting relhassubclass
for partitioned indexes feels more natural with what's on HEAD now.
Even if I'd like to see all those hypothetical columns in pg_class go
away, that cannot happen without a close lookup at the performance
impact.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2018-10-19 08:34:57 Re: Protect syscache from bloating with negative cache entries
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-10-19 06:17:59 Re: relhassubclass and partitioned indexes