Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode

On 2017/03/02 18:36, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> In acquire_inherited_sample_rows(), instead of inserting a whole
>>> stanza of logic just above the existing dispatch on relkind, I think
>>> we can get by with a very slightly update to what's already there.
>>>
>>> You can't use the result of a & b as a bool. You need to write (a &
>>> b) != 0, because the bool should always use 1 for true and 0 for
>>> false; it should not set some higher-numbered bit.
>>
>> Oops, thanks for fixing that. I suppose you are referring to this hunk in
>> the original patch:
>>
>> - relations = get_rel_oids(relid, relation);
>> + relations = get_rel_oids(relid, relation, options & VACOPT_VACUUM);
>>
>> And we need to do it this way in *this* case, because we're passing it as
>> a bool argument. I see that it's OK to do this:
>>
>> stmttype = (options & VACOPT_VACUUM) ? "VACUUM" : "ANALYZE";
>>
>> Or this:
>>
>> if (options & VACOPT_VACUUM)
>> {
>> PreventTransactionChain(isTopLevel, stmttype);
>
> In those cases it's still clearer, IMHO, to use != 0, but it's not
> necessary. However, when you're explicitly creating a value of type
> "bool", then it's necessary.

Agreed.

> Actually, looking at this again, I now think this part is wrong:
>
> + /*
> + * If only ANALYZE is to be performed, there is no need to include
> + * partitions in the list. In a database-wide ANALYZE, we only
> + * update the inheritance statistics of partitioned tables, not
> + * the statistics of individual partitions.
> + */
> + if (!is_vacuum && classForm->relispartition)
> continue;
>
> I was thinking earlier that an ANALYZE on the parent would also update
> the statistics for each child, but now I see that's not so. So now I

Yep, the patch enables ANALYZE to be propagated to partitions when the
parent table is specified in the command. The above logic in the patch
made the database-wide ANALYZE to ignore partitions, in which case, only
the inheritance statistics would be updated. I can also see why that'd be
undesirable.

> think we should omit this logic (and change the documentation to
> match). That is, a database-wide ANALYZE should update the statistics
> for each child as well as for the parent. Otherwise direct queries
> against the children (and partitionwise joins, once we have that) are
> going to go haywire.

OK, done. I updated both analyze.sgml and vacuum.sgml to be more up to
date. Both pages previously omitted materialized views.

Attached updated patches.

Thanks,
Amit