From: | Dmitry Koval <d(dot)koval(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands |
Date: | 2024-03-31 00:56:50 |
Message-ID: | 1c3149ff-f8ca-4c76-aaa3-08b2b47acfe9@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Alexander!
Thank you very much for your work on refactoring the commits!
Yesterday I received an email from adjkldd(at)126(dot)com <winterloo(at)126(dot)com>
with a proposal for optimization (MERGE PARTITION command) for cases
where the target partition has a name identical to one of the merging
partition names.
I think this optimization is worth considering.
A simplified version of the optimization is attached to this letter
(difference is 10-15 lines).
All changes made in one commit
(v28-0001-ALTER-TABLE-MERGE-PARTITIONS-command.patch) and in one
function (ATExecMergePartitions).
In your opinion, should we added this optimization now or should it be
left for later?
--
With best regards,
Dmitry Koval
Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v28-0001-ALTER-TABLE-MERGE-PARTITIONS-command.patch | text/plain | 105.0 KB |
v28-0002-ALTER-TABLE-SPLIT-PARTITION-command.patch | text/plain | 176.1 KB |
v28-0003-Documentation-for-ALTER-TABLE-SPLIT-PARTITION-ME.patch | text/plain | 9.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2024-03-31 01:03:25 | Re: pg_combinebackup --copy-file-range |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-03-31 00:37:25 | Re: pg_combinebackup --copy-file-range |