Re: [GSoC2014] Patch ALTER TABLE ... SET LOGGED

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: [GSoC2014] Patch ALTER TABLE ... SET LOGGED
Date: 2014-11-06 05:42:34
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTBuDQ_8DjnDYbykVPg9U9=rg-GSHUZB-D+ZcbG7LqnGA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
<fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Patch rebased and added to commitfest [1].
It looks like a good thing to remove ATChangeIndexesPersistence, this
puts the persistence switch directly into reindex process.

A couple of minor comments about this patch:
1) Reading it, I am wondering if it would not be finally time to
switch to a macro to get a relation's persistence, something like
RelationGetPersistence in rel.h... Not related directly to this patch.
2) reindex_index has as new argument a relpersislence value for the
new index. reindex_relation has differently a new set of flags to
enforce the relpersistence of all the underling indexes. Wouldn't it
be better for API consistency to pass directly a relpersistence value
through reindex_relation? In any case, the comment block of
reindex_relation does not contain a description of the new flags.
3) Here you may as well just set the value and be done:
+ /*
+ * Check if need to set the new relpersistence
+ */
+ if (iRel->rd_rel->relpersistence != relpersistence)
+ iRel->rd_rel->relpersistence = relpersistence;
Regards,
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2014-11-06 05:57:52 Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5)
Previous Message Jaime Casanova 2014-11-06 05:38:05 Re: Amazon Redshift