On 2020-Aug-29, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 08:22:42AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Yes, adding that to RemoveRelations() makes sense. Thanks for the
> > patch.
>
> I got some room to test the patch, and the place of the check looks
> good to me. I think that I would move the new check before we set
> PERFORM_DELETION_CONCURRENTLY for non-temporary relations though, as a
> partition tree can be temporary as long as all its members are
> temporary.
Actually I think you're wrong; if I put it before the check, then if I
do "drop index concurrently some_temp_partitioned_index" then it would
fail; but if I put it after the check, then it does a normal
non-concurrent index and it works. I'm not sure it's necessary to break
a case that otherwise works ...
(But for that to work I need to test the flag in the bitmask rather than
the option in the command, as in the attached).
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services