Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
Date
Msg-id 20171114144008.mlmuulkzlxacnelc@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 13 November 2017 at 12:55, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> > Somehow I managed to include an unrelated patch as attachment.  Here's
> > another attempt (on which I also lightly touched ddl.sgml with relevant
> > changes).
> 
> Looks good. Some minor comments below.
> 
> 0001- Simplify
> Seems useful as separate step; agree with everything, no further comments

Thanks, pushed.

> Why uint16? Why not just uint?

*Shrug*.  16 bits seem plenty enough.  I changed it to bits16, which we
use in other places for bitmasks.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Transaction control in procedures
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table