On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 15:21, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 01:27:07PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > Good catch. The patch looks good to me.
>
> While this patch is logically correct. I think that we should try to
> not increase more the number of queries used to scan pg_class
> depending on a list of relkinds. For example, did you notice that
> your new Query_for_list_of_vacuumables becomes the same query as
> Query_for_list_of_indexables?
Oh, I didn't realize that.
Looking at target relation kinds for operations in-depth, I think that
the relation list for index creation and the relation list for vacuum
is different.
Query_for_list_of_indexables should search for:
RELKIND_RELATION
RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE
RELKIND_MATVIEW
whereas Query_for_list_of_vacuumables should search for:
RELKIND_RELATION
RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE
RELKIND_MATVIEW
RELKIND_TOASTVALUE
Also, Query_for_list_of_clusterables is further different from the
above two lists. It should search for:
RELKIND_RELATION
RELKIND_MATVIEW
RELKIND_TOASTVALUE
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services