Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, 李杰(慎追) <adger(dot)lj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, 曾文旌(义从) <wenjing(dot)zwj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>
Subject: Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index
Date: 2022-04-02 17:21:11
Message-ID: 202204021721.myr2alroeunz@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Small things here.

1. in VACUUM FULL we only process partitions that are owned by the
invoking user. We don't have this test in the new code. I'm not sure
why do we do that there; is it worth doing the same here?

2. We should silently skip a partition that's a foreign table, I

3. We do mark the index on the partitions as indisclustered AFAICS (we
claim that the partitioned table's index is not marked, which is
accurate). So users doing unadorned CLUSTER afterwards will get the
partitions clustered too, once they cluster the partitioned table. If
they don't want this, they would have to ALTER TABLE to remove the
marking. How likely is that this will be a problem? Maybe documenting
this point is enough.

Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland —
Voy a acabar con todos los humanos / con los humanos yo acabaré
voy a acabar con todos (bis) / con todos los humanos acabaré ¡acabaré! (Bender)

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joseph Koshakow 2022-04-02 17:29:32 Re: Fix overflow in DecodeInterval
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-04-02 17:20:56 Re: Fix overflow in DecodeInterval