From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Getting ERROR: could not open file "base/13164/t3_16388" with partition table with ON COMMIT |
Date: | 2018-11-02 01:51:52 |
Message-ID: | 20181102015152.GU1727@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:04:43PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 12:39:16PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Rajkumar pointed out off-list that the patch still remains to be applied.
>> Considering that there is a planned point release on Nov 8, maybe we
>> should do something about this?
>
> Yes doing something about that very soon would be a good idea. Tom,
> are you planning to look at it or should I jump in?
And so I am looking at v3 now...
Adding a test case in temp.sql would be nice.
Would it make sense to support TRUNCATE on a materialized as well in the
future? It seems to me that it is dangerous to assume that only
relations make use of heap_truncate_one_rel() anyway as modules or
external code could perfectly call it. And the thing is documented
to work on a relation, including materialized views, not just an
ordinary table which is what RELKIND_RELATION only mentions. On the
contrary we know that heap_truncate() works only on temporary
relations. It is documented to do so and does so.
So it seems to me that Tom correctly mentioned to add the check in
heap_truncate, not heap_truncate_one_rel(), so v3 looks incorrect to
me.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-11-02 01:54:54 | Re: CF app feature request |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-11-02 01:27:52 | Re: partitioned indexes and tablespaces |