Re: [PATCH] Tab completion for VACUUM of partitioned tables

Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-07-29T09:41:16Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 15:21, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 01:27:07PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > Good catch. The patch looks good to me.
>
> While this patch is logically correct.  I think that we should try to
> not increase more the number of queries used to scan pg_class
> depending on a list of relkinds.  For example, did you notice that
> your new Query_for_list_of_vacuumables becomes the same query as
> Query_for_list_of_indexables?

Oh, I didn't realize that.

Looking at target relation kinds for operations in-depth, I think that
the relation list for index creation and the relation list for vacuum
is different.

Query_for_list_of_indexables should search for:

RELKIND_RELATION
RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE
RELKIND_MATVIEW

whereas Query_for_list_of_vacuumables should search for:

RELKIND_RELATION
RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE
RELKIND_MATVIEW
RELKIND_TOASTVALUE

Also, Query_for_list_of_clusterables is further different from the
above two lists. It should search for:

RELKIND_RELATION
RELKIND_MATVIEW
RELKIND_TOASTVALUE

Regards,

-- 
Masahiko Sawada            http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



Commits

  1. Include partitioned tables for tab completion of VACUUM in psql