Re: Ought to use heap_multi_insert() for pg_attribute/depend insertions?

> On 26 Jun 2020, at 10:11, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 09:38:23AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Attached is a rebased version which was updated to handle the changes for op
>> class parameters introduced in 911e70207703799605.
>
> Thanks for the updated version.

Thanks for reviewing!

> While re-reading the code, I got cold feet with the changes done in
> recordDependencyOn(). Sure, we could do as you propose, but that does
> not have to be part of this patch I think, aimed at switching more
> catalogs to use multi inserts, and it just feels a duplicate of
> recordMultipleDependencies(), with the same comments copied all over
> the place, etc.

Fair enough, I can take that to another patch later in the cycle.

> MAX_TEMPLATE_BYTES in pg_shdepend.c needs a comment to explain that
> this is to cap the number of slots used in
> copyTemplateDependencies() for pg_shdepend.

Agreed, +1 on the proposed wording.

> Not much a fan of the changes in GenerateTypeDependencies(),
> particularly the use of refobjs[8], capped to the number of items from
> typeForm. If we add new members I think that this would break
> easily without us actually noticing that it broke.

Yeah, thats not good, it's better to leave that out.

> The use of
> ObjectAddressSet() is a good idea though, but it does not feel
> consistent if you don't the same coding rule to typbasetype,
> typcollation or typelem. I am also thinking to split this part of the
> cleanup in a first independent patch.

+1 on splitting into a separate patch.

> pg_constraint.c, pg_operator.c, extension.c and pg_aggregate.c were
> using ObjectAddressSubSet() with subset set to 0 when registering a
> dependency. It is simpler to just use ObjectAddressSet().

Fair enough, either way, I don't have strong opinions.

> As this
> updates the way dependencies are tracked and recorded, that's better
> if kept in the main patch.

Agreed.

> + /* TODO is nreferenced a reasonable allocation of slots? */
> + slot = palloc(sizeof(TupleTableSlot *) * nreferenced);
> It seems to me that we could just apply the same rule as for
> pg_attribute and pg_shdepend, no?

I think so, I see no reason not to.

> CatalogTupleInsertWithInfo() becomes mostly unused with this patch,
> its only caller being now LOs. Just noticing, I'd rather not remove
> it for now.

Agreed, let's not bite off that too here, there's enough to chew on.

> The attached includes a bunch of modifications I have done while going
> through the patch (I indend to split and apply the changes of
> pg_type.c separately first, just lacked of time now to send a proper
> split), and there is the number of slots for pg_depend insertions that
> still needs to be addressed. On top of that pgindent has not been run
> yet. That's all I have for today, overall the patch is taking a
> committable shape :)

I like it, thanks for hacking on it. I will take another look at it later
today when back at my laptop.

cheers ./daniel