Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables
Date
Msg-id 1605789.1678652046@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Responses Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 03:36:10PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I took a look through this.  It seems like basically a good solution,
>> but the count_leaf_partitions() function is bothering me, for two
>> reasons:

> ... find_all_inheritors() will also have been called by
> ProcessUtilitySlow().  Maybe it's sufficient to mention that ?

Hm.  Could we get rid of count_leaf_partitions by doing the work in
ProcessUtilitySlow?  Or at least passing that OID list forward instead
of recomputing it?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables
Next
From: Attila Soki
Date:
Subject: WIP Patch: pg_dump structured