Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation

(I find the misspelled subject makes it difficult to find the thread..)

At Thu, 27 Apr 2023 14:47:41 +0200, Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote in
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:55 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Rebased.
> >
> > I fixed some code comments and commit messages. I fixed the wrong
> > arrangement of some changes among patches. Most importantly, I fixed
> > the a bug based on a wrong assumption that init-fork is not resides on
> > shared buffers. Now smgrDoPendingCleanups drops buffer for a init-fork
> > to be removed.
> >
> > The new fourth patch is a temporary fix for recently added code, which
> > will soon be no longer needed.

This is no longer needed. Thank you, Thomas!

> Hi Kyotaro,
>
> I've retested v28 of the patch with everything that came to my mind
> (basic tests, --enable-tap-tests, restarts/crashes along adding the
> data, checking if there were any files left over and I've checked for
> stuff that earlier was causing problems: GiST on geometry[PostGIS]).

Maybe it's fixed by dropping buffers.

> The only thing I've not tested this time were the performance runs
> done earlier. The patch passed all my very limited tests along with
> make check-world. Patch looks good to me on the surface from a
> usability point of view. I haven't looked at the code, so the patch
> might still need an in-depth review.

Thank you for conducting a thorough test. In this patchset, the first
one might be useful on its own and it is the most complex part. I'll
recheck it.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center