| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect |
| Date: | 2018-05-09 21:05:47 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmyPS3BcvZnDWDD3LwKxb0M76icOn5LmoB=Nr7eOSHZyA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 02:28:50PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I pushed some fixes produced here. Attached is the remainder of the
>> patch you submitted. I notice now that we haven't actually fixed
>> Peter's source of complaint, though. AFAICS your patch just adds test
>> cases, and upthread discussion apparently converges on not doing
>> anything about the code. I'm not yet sure what to think of that ...
>
> Thanks Álvaro. I tend to think that there is little point in changing
> the error handling, still it would be good to get test coverage. That's
> not really a bug though as in all those cases we don't get errors like
> "could not open file" or such. So we could also let things as they are
> now.
Now that the relkind issue is documented, I wouldn't mind just leaving it as-is.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-05-09 21:08:47 | Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-05-09 21:04:26 | Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect |