| 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 |
| Message-ID: | 20190127133301.GA15401@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| 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..
--
Michael
| 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 |