Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Date: 2018-11-16 14:38:40
Message-ID: CA+Tgmob1o8UUzoTHnS+zMfs37iOLCFzc4LdwgQJ65rEu-WZ6oQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 8:58 PM Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> The partition_bounds_copy() is not because of your changes, it's there in
> HEAD.

OK, but it seems to me that your version of my patch rearranges the
code more than necessary.

How about the attached?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0001-Reduce-unnecessary-list-construction-in-RelationB.patch application/octet-stream 11.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-11-16 14:55:26 Re: Convert MAX_SAOP_ARRAY_SIZE to new guc
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2018-11-16 14:38:26 Re: pg11.1 jit segv