From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Shaky coding for vacuuming partitioned relations |
Date: | 2017-09-29 16:43:13 |
Message-ID: | 1016.1506703393@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> If I understand correctly, problem #1 is that get_rel_oids() can emit
> a user-visible cache lookup failure message. There is a proposed patch
> by Michael Paquier which appears to implement the design suggested by
> Tom. I think that the normal procedure would be for Tom to commit
> that change if he's happy with it.
Yes, I'm happy to take responsibility for this.
> I don't think I understand problem #2. I think the concern is about
> reporting the proper relation name when VACUUM cascades from a
> partitioned table to its children and then some kind of concurrent DDL
> happens, but I don't see a clear explanation on the thread as to what
> exactly the failure scenario is, and I didn't see a problem in some
> simple tests I just ran. Furthermore, it sounds like this might get
> fixed as part of committing the patch to allow VACUUM to mention
> multiple tables, which Tom has indicated he will handle.
I think the conclusion was that this wouldn't actually happen in v10,
but I will take a closer look and do something about it if it is possible.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-29 16:46:23 | Re: Shaky coding for vacuuming partitioned relations |
Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2017-09-29 16:39:43 | Re: pgbench - minor fix for meta command only scripts |