From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Shaky coding for vacuuming partitioned relations
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:43:13 -0400
Message-ID: <1016.1506703393@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZC2nd8cqjVytUV3T37BWwpNx8awENGQEpTxAsFSPCYGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <25023.1506107590@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20170928053123.GD37725@rfd.leadboat.com>
<CA+TgmoZC2nd8cqjVytUV3T37BWwpNx8awENGQEpTxAsFSPCYGw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> If I understand correctly, problem #1 is that get_rel_oids() can emit
> a user-visible cache lookup failure message. There is a proposed patch
> by Michael Paquier which appears to implement the design suggested by
> Tom. I think that the normal procedure would be for Tom to commit
> that change if he's happy with it.
Yes, I'm happy to take responsibility for this.
> I don't think I understand problem #2. I think the concern is about
> reporting the proper relation name when VACUUM cascades from a
> partitioned table to its children and then some kind of concurrent DDL
> happens, but I don't see a clear explanation on the thread as to what
> exactly the failure scenario is, and I didn't see a problem in some
> simple tests I just ran. Furthermore, it sounds like this might get
> fixed as part of committing the patch to allow VACUUM to mention
> multiple tables, which Tom has indicated he will handle.
I think the conclusion was that this wouldn't actually happen in v10,
but I will take a closer look and do something about it if it is possible.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, noah@leadboat.com
Subject: Re: Shaky coding for vacuuming partitioned relations
In-Reply-To: <1016.1506703393@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox