Re: [HACKERS] Use of RangeVar for partitioned tables in autovacuum - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bossart, Nathan
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Use of RangeVar for partitioned tables in autovacuum
Date
Msg-id 40FE9F7B-E130-4A2C-ABAD-7DF4866C7BF9@amazon.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Use of RangeVar for partitioned tables in autovacuum  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Use of RangeVar for partitioned tables in autovacuum
List pgsql-hackers
On 9/26/17, 9:28 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> In conclusion, I think that the open item of $subject should be
> removed from the list, and we should try to get the multi-VACUUM patch
> in to cover any future problems. I'll do so if there are no
> objections.

If someone did want to add logging for vacuum_rel() and analyze_rel() in
v10 after your patch was applied, wouldn't the NULL RangeVars force us to
skip the new log statements for partitions?  I think we might instead
want to back-patch the VacuumRelation infrastructure so that we can
appropriately log for partitions.

However, I'm dubious that it is necessary to make such a big change so
close to release for hypothetical log statements. So, in the end, I agree
with you.

Nathan


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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Antonin Houska
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Separate log file for extension
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Binary search in fmgr_isbuiltin() is a bottleneck.