Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Date: 2018-11-15 05:38:30
Message-ID: 20181115053830.GC1374@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 01:38:55PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> I've fixed 0001 again to re-order the code so that allocations happen the
> correct context and now tests pass with the rebased patches.

I have been looking at 0001, and it seems to me that you make even more
messy the current situation. Coming to my point: do we have actually
any need to set rel->rd_pdcxt and rel->rd_partdesc at all if a relation
has no partitions? It seems to me that we had better set rd_pdcxt and
rd_partdesc to NULL in this case.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurenz Albe 2018-11-15 05:48:00 Re: reloption to prevent VACUUM from truncating empty pages at the end of relation
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2018-11-15 05:30:06 Re: Synchronous replay take III