Re: [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands

From: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands
Date: 2017-09-07 00:46:08
Message-ID: 27EFA4A1-DE46-4607-91E2-509AF7635C05@amazon.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 9/5/17, 5:53 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Bossart, Nathan <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 9/4/17, 8:16 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> So I would tend to think that the same column specified multiple times
>>> should cause an error, and that we could let VACUUM run work N times
>>> on a relation if it is specified this much. This feels more natural,
>>> at least to me, and it keeps the code simple.
>>
>> I think that is a reasonable approach. Another option I was thinking
>> about was to de-duplicate only the individual column lists. This
>> alternative approach might be a bit more user-friendly, but I am
>> beginning to agree with you that perhaps we should not try to infer
>> the intent of the user in these "duplicate" scenarios.
>>
>> I'll work on converting the existing de-duplication patch into
>> something more like what you suggested.
>
> Cool. I'll look at anything you have.

I've attached v1 of this patch. I think we might want to refactor the
code for retrieving the relation name from a RangeVar, but it would
probably be better to do that in a separate patch.

Nathan

Attachment Content-Type Size
vacuum_multiple_tables_v14.patch application/octet-stream 31.7 KB
error_on_duplicate_columns_in_analyze_v1.patch application/octet-stream 4.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-09-07 01:11:51 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_rewind: Fix some problems when copying files >2GB.
Previous Message Tatsuro Yamada 2017-09-07 00:22:40 Re: Minor code improvement to postgresGetForeignPlan