From: | Michael Harris <harmic(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl, ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: ANALYZE ONLY |
Date: | 2024-09-09 07:56:54 |
Message-ID: | CADofcAVYsvj=RYdBcpqreC-4yc474n-3noyuqzzmq9VagTWS2A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for the feedback David.
On Mon, 9 Sept 2024 at 11:27, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> You've written "was" (past tense), but then the existing text uses
> "will" (future tense). I guess if the point in time is after parse and
> before work has been done, then that's correct, but I think using "is"
> instead of "was" is better.
> Maybe "are also vacuumed" instead of "are vacuumed" is more clear?
Agreed. I have updated my patch with both of these suggestions.
> 4. A very minor detail, but I think in vacuum.c the WARNING you've
> added should use RelationGetRelationName(). We seem to be very
> inconsistent with using that macro and I see it's not used just above
> for the lock warning, which I imagine you copied.
As far as I can tell RelationGetRelationName is for extracting the name
from a Relation struct, but in this case we have a RangeVar so it doesn't appear
to be applicable. I could not find an equivalent access macro for RangeVar.
Thanks again.
Cheers
Mike
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v4-0001-Implementation-of-the-ONLY-feature.patch | application/octet-stream | 15.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jian he | 2024-09-09 08:31:33 | Re: not null constraints, again |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-09-09 07:42:41 | Re: Invalid Assert while validating REPLICA IDENTITY? |