RE: A reloption for partitioned tables - parallel_workers

From: "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: Seamus Abshere <seamus(at)abshere(dot)net>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: A reloption for partitioned tables - parallel_workers
Date: 2021-02-18 09:06:26
Message-ID: d5416a5e292249ebbabd8bbe592f0b70@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> hi,
>
> Here we go, my first patch... solves
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/7d6fdc20-857c-4cbe-ae2e-c0ff9520
> ed55(at)www(dot)fastmail(dot)com
>

Hi,

partitioned_table_reloptions(Datum reloptions, bool validate)
{
+ static const relopt_parse_elt tab[] = {
+ {"parallel_workers", RELOPT_TYPE_INT,
+ offsetof(StdRdOptions, parallel_workers)},
+ };
+
return (bytea *) build_reloptions(reloptions, validate,
RELOPT_KIND_PARTITIONED,
- 0, NULL, 0);
+ sizeof(StdRdOptions),
+ tab, lengthof(tab));
}

I noticed that you plan to store the parallel_workers in the same struct(StdRdOptions) as normal heap relation.
It seems better to store it in a separate struct.

And as commit 1bbd608 said:
----
> Splitting things has the advantage to
> make the information stored in rd_options include only the necessary
> information, reducing the amount of memory used for a relcache entry
> with partitioned tables if new reloptions are introduced at this level.
----

What do you think?

Best regards,
Houzj

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2021-02-18 09:12:39 Re: [PATCH] pg_hba.conf error messages for logical replication connections
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2021-02-18 08:49:59 Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions