Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Partitioned tables and covering indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jaime Casanova
Subject Re: Partitioned tables and covering indexes
Date
Msg-id CAJGNTeM=XO2eve+YFdwS5ag+zQi6mHa5d-iKNLtNVZcMwvThcQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Partitioned tables and covering indexes  (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On 10 April 2018 at 10:36, Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> wrote:
>>     Does the attached fix look correct?  Haven't checked the fix with
>> ATTACH
>>     PARTITION though.
>>
>>
>> Attached patch seems to fix the problem.  However, I would rather get
>> rid of modifying stmt->indexParams.  That seems to be more logical
>> for me.  Also, it would be good to check some covering indexes on
>> partitioned tables.  See the attached patch.
>
> Seems right way, do not modify incoming object and do not copy rather large
> and deep nested structure as suggested by Amit.
>
> But it will  be better to have a ATTACH PARTITION test too.
>

the patch worked for me, i also tried some combinations using ATTACH
PARTITION and found no problems

-- 
Jaime Casanova                      www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS