Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bossart, Nathan
Тема Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands
Дата
Msg-id 6DC876DF-74F3-4B3F-A7E6-C5F9DC4DDA91@amazon.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables inVACUUM commands  ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 9/3/17, 11:46 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did not consider first that the list portion also needed to be
> modified, perhaps because I am not coding that myself... So now that
> it is becoming more complicated what about just using AutovacMemCxt?
> This would simplify the list of VacuumRelation entries and the
> RangeVar creation as well, and honestly this is ugly and there are no
> other similar patterns in the backend code:

+1

> This would become way more readable by using makeRangeVar() and the
> new makeVacuumRelation. As this is partly my fault that we are at this
> state, I am fine as well to remove this burden from you, Nathan, and
> fix that myself in a new version. And I don't want to step on your
> toes either :)

No worries, I can take care of it.  I appreciate your patience with all
of these reviews.

Nathan


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Konstantin Knizhnik
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Secondary index access optimizations
Следующее
От: Alexey Chernyshov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] index-only count(*) for indexes supporting bitmap scans