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>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: hyrax vs. RelationBuildPartitionDesc |
Date: | 2019-03-14 01:40:31 |
Message-ID: | 036852f2-ba7f-7a1f-21c6-00bc3515eda3@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019/03/14 5:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 3:14 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Meanwhile, who's going to take point on cleaning up rd_partcheck?
>>> I don't really understand this code well enough to know whether that
>>> can share one of the existing partitioning-related sub-contexts.
>
>> To your question, I think it probably can't share a context. Briefly,
>> rd_partkey can't change ever, except that when a partitioned relation
>> is in the process of being created it is briefly NULL; once it obtains
>> a value, that value cannot be changed. If you want to range-partition
>> a list-partitioned table or something like that, you have to drop the
>> table and create a new one. I think that's a perfectly acceptable
>> permanent limitation and I have no urge whatever to change it.
>> rd_partdesc changes when you attach or detach a child partition.
>> rd_partcheck is the reverse: it changes when you attach or detach this
>> partition to or from a parent.
>
> Got it. Yeah, it seems like the clearest and least bug-prone solution
> is for those to be in three separate sub-contexts. The only reason
> I was trying to avoid that was the angle of how to back-patch into 11.
> However, we can just add the additional context pointer field at the
> end of the Relation struct in v11, and that should be good enough to
> avoid ABI problems.
Agree that rd_partcheck needs its own context as you have complained in
the past [1].
I think we'll need to back-patch this fix to PG 10 as well. I've attached
patches for all 3 branches.
Thanks,
Amit
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/22236.1523374067%40sss.pgh.pa.us
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
rd_partkeycxt-HEAD.patch | text/plain | 2.4 KB |
rd_partkeycxt-pg10.patch | text/plain | 2.4 KB |
rd_partkeycxt-pg11.patch | text/plain | 2.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashwin Agrawal | 2019-03-14 01:41:52 | Re: Using the return value of strlcpy() and strlcat() |
Previous Message | John Naylor | 2019-03-14 01:38:33 | Re: WIP: Avoid creation of the free space map for small tables |