From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: WARNING: relcache reference leak: relation "p1" not closed |
Date: | 2017-03-07 06:43:05 |
Message-ID: | c146940e-7e17-4f1f-d2aa-fac39be9bcbf@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/03/07 14:04, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> Also, I found out that alter_table.sql mistakenly forgot to drop
>> partitioned table "p1". Patch 0002 takes care of that.
>
> While that might or might not have been intentional, I think it's an
> astoundingly bad idea to not leave any partitioned tables behind in
> the final state of the regression database. Doing so would likely
> have meant that this particular bug evaded detection for much longer
> than it did. Moreover, it would mean that the pg_upgrade test would
> have exactly no coverage of partitioned cases.
That's true. Should have been apparent to me.
> Therefore, there should definitely be a partitioned table, hopefully with
> a less generic name than "p1", in the final regression DB state. Whether
> this particular one from alter_table.sql is a good candidate, I dunno.
> But let's not drop it without adding a better-thought-out replacement.
OK, let's drop p1 in alter_table.sql. I think a partitioned table created
in insert.sql is a good candidate to keep around after having it renamed,
which patch 0003 does.
Thanks,
Amit
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Fix-relcache-ref-leak-in-acquire_inherited_sample_ro.patch | text/x-diff | 3.8 KB |
0002-Drop-a-table-mistakenly-left-behind-by-alter_table.s.patch | text/x-diff | 1.1 KB |
0003-Leave-a-partitioned-table-in-the-regression-database.patch | text/x-diff | 12.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Haribabu Kommi | 2017-03-07 06:45:23 | Re: ANALYZE command progress checker |
Previous Message | Ashutosh Sharma | 2017-03-07 06:33:27 | Re: Parallel seq. plan is not coming against inheritance or partition table |