Re: A few new options for vacuumdb

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A few new options for vacuumdb
Date: 2019-01-27 13:33:01
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 12:49:28AM +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> Oh, wow. Thanks for pointing this out. I should have caught this.
> With 0002, we are basically just throwing out the column lists
> entirely as we obtain the qualified identifiers from the catalog
> query. To fix this, I've added an optional CTE for tracking any
> provided column lists. v5-0001 is your test patch for this case, and
> v5-0002 splits out the work for split_table_columns_spec().

Committed the test portion for now, still reviewing the rest..

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-01-27 14:56:39 Re: Opossum vs. float4 NaN
Previous Message Andrew Gierth 2019-01-27 13:22:57 Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs