Message-ID: <88903179-5ce2-3d4d-af43-7830372bdcb6@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:05:26 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: document the need to analyze partitioned tables
Content-Language: en-US
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?=c3=81lvaro_Herrera?= <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
 yuzuko <yuzukohosoya@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <20210913035409.GA10647@telsasoft.com>
 <20211008125822.GJ27491@telsasoft.com>
 <681e76ad-3a7b-ea3c-b6b0-55946239c49b@enterprisedb.com>
 <20220121180200.GM23027@telsasoft.com>
 <19c248d9-3687-9e0f-0b1a-2adad1de6fbe@enterprisedb.com>
 <CA+TgmoYNaSWQg1W3JZ62UBM9iMphBpVJr_oDxn5T1X_viOPBtw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220315230011.GZ28503@telsasoft.com>
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220315230011.GZ28503@telsasoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/88903179-5ce2-3d4d-af43-7830372bdcb6%40enterprisedb.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 3/16/22 00:00, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 05:23:54PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 1:31 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>> [ new patch ]
>>
>> This patch is originally by Justin. The latest version is by Tomas. I
>> think the next step is for Justin to say whether he's OK with the
>> latest version that Tomas posted. If he is, then I suggest that he
>> also mark it Ready for Committer, and that Tomas commit it. If he's
>> not, he should say what he wants changed and either post a new version
>> himself or wait for Tomas to do that.
> 
> Yes, I think it can be Ready.  Done.
> 
> I amended some of Tomas' changes (see 0003, attached as txt).
> 
> @cfbot: the *.patch file is for your consumption, and the others are only there
> to show my changes.
> 
>> I think the fact that is classified as a "Bug Fix" in the CommitFest
>> application is not particularly good. I would prefer to see it
>> classified under "Documentation". I'm prepared to concede that
>> documentation can have bugs as a general matter, but nobody's data is
>> getting eaten because the documentation wasn't updated. In fact, this
>> is the fourth patch from the "bug fix" section I've studied this
>> afternoon, and, well, none of them have been back-patchable code
>> defects.
> 
> In fact, I consider this to be back-patchable back to v10.  IMO it's an
> omission that this isn't documented.  Not all bugs cause data to be eaten.  If
> someone reads the existing documentation, they might conclude that their
> partitioned tables don't need to be analyzed, and they would've been better
> served by not reading the docs.
> 

I've pushed the last version, and backpatched it to 10 (not sure I'd
call it a bugfix, but I certainly agree with Justin it's worth
mentioning in the docs, even on older branches).


regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company