On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 at 16:35, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 at 13:23, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > But wouldn't an even cheaper way here be to iterate over the children in
> > reverse order when match_partition_order_desc? We can do that efficiently
> > now. Looks like we don't have a readymade helper for it, but it'd be easy
> > enough to add or open code.
>
> That seems fair. I think open coding is a better option. I had a go
> at foreach_reverse recently and decided to keep clear of it due to
> behavioural differences with foreach_delete_current().
I've pushed a patch for this now. Thank you for the idea.
David