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 C237BB73-E7F3-4AC9-8B88-C8810EEB002D@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  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 9/12/17, 9:47 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> - * relid, if not InvalidOid, indicate the relation to process; otherwise,
> - * the RangeVar is used.  (The latter must always be passed, because it's
> - * used for error messages.)
> [...]
> +typedef struct VacuumRelation
> +{
> +   NodeTag      type;
> +   RangeVar    *relation;  /* single table to process */
> +   List        *va_cols;   /* list of column names, or NIL for all */
> +   Oid      oid;       /* corresponding OID (filled in by [auto]vacuum.c) */
> +} VacuumRelation;
> We lose a bit of information here. I think that it would be good to
> mention in the declaration of VacuumRelation that the RangeVar is used
> for error processing, and needs to be filled. I have complained about
> that upthread already, perhaps this has slipped away when rebasing.

I've added a comment to this effect in v18 of the main patch.

> +           int i = attnameAttNum(rel, col, false);
> +
> +           if (i != InvalidAttrNumber)
> +               continue;
> Nit: allocating "i" makes little sense here. You are not using it for
> any other checks.

True.  I've removed "i" in v18.

>  /*
> - * Build a list of Oids for each relation to be processed
> + * Determine the OID for each relation to be processed
>   *
>   * The list is built in vac_context so that it will survive across our
>   * per-relation transactions.
>   */
> -static List *
> -get_rel_oids(Oid relid, const RangeVar *vacrel)
> +static void
> +get_rel_oids(List **vacrels)
> Yeah, that's not completely correct either. This would be more like
> "Fill in the list of VacuumRelation entries with their corresponding
> OIDs, adding extra entries for partitioned tables".

I've added some more accurate comments for get_rel_oids() in v18.

> Those are minor points. The patch seems to be in good shape, and
> passes all my tests, including some pgbench'ing to make sure that
> nothing goes weird. So I'll be happy to finally switch both patches to
> "ready for committer" once those minor points are addressed.

Awesome.

Nathan


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Langote
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Race between SELECT and ALTER TABLE NO INHERIT
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Call RelationDropStorage() for broader range ofobject drops.