Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table

On 15 November 2017 at 06:49, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
wrote:

> Here's the remaining bits, rebased.

Hi,

I've not had time for a thorough look at this, but on a quick scan I
noticed that CompareIndexInfo() missed checking if the Index AM matches the
AM of the partitioned index.

Testing with:

create table p (a int not null) partition by range (a);
create table p1 partition of p for values from (1) to (10);
create table p2 partition of p for values from (10) to (20);
create index on p1 using btree (a);
create index on p2 using hash (a);
create index on p (a);

I see it ends up making use of the hash index on p2 to support the index
that's stored as a btree on the partitioned table. I think these should
match so that the operations we can perform on the index are all aligned.

--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services