Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 16:45:08 -0500
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
	Yuzuko <yuzukohosoya@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: pgsql: autovacuum: handle analyze for partitioned tables
Message-ID: <20210409214508.GV6592@telsasoft.com>
References: 
 <CA+TgmoaVOx7K0BE8xpR=_FwLGEP1kJoSx+oskCsVGmuJq5h4vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210409213155.GA23912@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210409213155.GA23912@alvherre.pgsql>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210409214508.GV6592%40telsasoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 05:31:55PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Apr-09, Robert Haas wrote:
> 
> > Does this need to worry about new partitions getting attached to a
> > partitioned table, or old ones getting detached? (Maybe it does
> > already, not sure.)
> 
> Good question.  It does not.

I think there's probably cases where this is desirable, and cases where it's
undesirable, so I don't think it's necessarily a problem.

One data point: we do DETACH/ATTACH tables during normal operation, before
type-promoting ALTERs, to avoid worst-case disk use, and to avoid locking the
table for a long time.  It'd be undesirable (but maybe of no great consequence)
to trigger an ALTER when we DETACH them, since we'll re-ATTACH it shortly
afterwards.

However, I think DROP should be handled ?

-- 
Justin