Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index
Date
Msg-id YlqveniXn9AI6RFZ@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 10:37:06PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thanks for the patch -- I have pushed it now, with some wording changes
> and renaming the role to regress_* to avoid buildfarm's ire.

Cool, thanks.

> Michaël in addition proposes an isolation test.  I'm not sure; is it
> worth the additional test run time?  It doesn't seem a critical issue.
> But if anybody feels like contributing one, step right ahead.

Well, I am a bit annoyed that we don't actually check that a CLUSTER
command does not block when doing a CLUSTER on a partitioned table
while a lock is held on one of its partitions.  So, attached is a
proposal of patch to improve the test coverage in this area.  While on
it, I have added a test with a normal table.  You can see the
difference once you remove the ACL check added recently in
get_tables_to_cluster_partitioned().  What do you think?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Erik Rijkers
Date:
Subject: TRAP: FailedAssertion("tabstat->trans == trans", File: "pgstat_relation.c", Line: 508
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("tabstat->trans == trans", File: "pgstat_relation.c", Line: 508