On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 at 08:23, Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 02:21:40PM +0800, Japin Li wrote: >> On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 at 04:29, Bertrand Drouvot >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Yeah, and removing IS_INDEX() and adding a check for partitioned indexes >> > would >> > still mean 2 code paths. So, v2 changes the close calls (and that's >> > consistent >> > with what pgstatginindex_internal() is doing. >> > >> >> It would be reasonable to add a comment explaining the choice of >> relation_open()/relation_close() instead of the index-specific >> index_open()/index_close(). > > Yeah that would not hurt. What about before the relation_open() calls? > > " > Use relation_open() and not index_open() to avoid the validate_relation_kind() > check as we handle relation validation separately below. > " >
LGTM. -- Regards, Japin Li ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.
