Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE .. DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Date: 2021-04-21 00:46:49
Message-ID: 20210421004649.GA1951@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Actually I had a silly bug in the version that attempted to cache a
partdesc that omits detached partitions. This one, while not fully
baked, seems to work correctly (on top of the previous one).

The thing that I don't fully understand is why we have to require to
have built the regular one first.

--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W
"This is what I like so much about PostgreSQL. Most of the surprises
are of the "oh wow! That's cool" Not the "oh shit!" kind. :)"
Scott Marlowe, http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2008-10/msg00152.php

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-separately-cache-a-partdesc-that-omits-detached-part.patch text/x-diff 3.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Xing GUO 2021-04-21 00:53:46 Re: `make check` doesn't pass on MacOS Catalina
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-04-21 00:31:34 Re: Table refer leak in logical replication