| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Partitioned tables and [un]loggedness |
| Date: | 2024-09-10 00:42:31 |
| Message-ID: | Zt-V90bS4diq4e0Q@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 03:56:14PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> How about inventing a new ATT_PARTITIONED_TABLE and make a clean split
> between both relkinds? I'd guess that blocking both SET LOGGED and
> UNLOGGED for partitioned tables is the best move, even if it is
> possible to block only one or the other, of course.
I gave it a try, and while it is much more invasive, it is also much
more consistent with the rest of the file.
Thoughts?
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-Introduce-ATT_PARTITIONED_TABLE-in-tablecmds.c.patch | text/x-diff | 18.3 KB |
| v4-0002-Remove-support-for-ALTER-TABLE-.-SET-UN-LOGGED-on.patch | text/x-diff | 6.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2024-09-10 01:20:01 | Re: query_id, pg_stat_activity, extended query protocol |
| Previous Message | Ed Behn | 2024-09-10 00:40:21 | Re: access numeric data in module |