Re: Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information.
Thank you for review and commit. On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 1:12 PM Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:01:59AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:22:28AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > >> On 2018/12/15 8:00, Michael Paquier wrote: > >>> I tend to agree with your comment here. pg_tables lists partitioned > >>> tables, but pg_indexes is forgotting about partitioned indexes. So > this > >>> is a good thing to add. > >> > >> +1 > > > > I'll go commit something close to what Suraj is proposing if there are > > no objections from others. At least we agree on that part ;) > > And this part is done. > -- > Michael > -- -- Thanks & Regards, Suraj kharage, EnterpriseDB Corporation, The Postgres Database Company. *Are you updated: Latest version of EnterpriseDB Postgres Advanced Server are 10.6.13, 9.6.11.18, 9.5.15.21, 9.4.19.28* To reach Support Call: US +1-732-331-1320 or 1-800-235-5891 UK +44-2033 7198 20 - BRAZIL+55-2129 5813 71 - INDIA+91-20-66449612 Australia: +61 26145 2339. Website: www.enterprisedb.com EnterpriseDB Blog : http://blogs.enterprisedb.com Follow us on Twitter : http://www.twitter.com/enterprisedb PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail message (and any attachment) is intended for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. This message contains information from EnterpriseDB Corporation that may be privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or authorized to receive this for the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution,retention, archiving, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message.
Re: Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:01:59AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:22:28AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: >> On 2018/12/15 8:00, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> I tend to agree with your comment here. pg_tables lists partitioned >>> tables, but pg_indexes is forgotting about partitioned indexes. So this >>> is a good thing to add. >> >> +1 > > I'll go commit something close to what Suraj is proposing if there are > no objections from others. At least we agree on that part ;) And this part is done. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:22:28AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2018/12/15 8:00, Michael Paquier wrote: >> I tend to agree with your comment here. pg_tables lists partitioned >> tables, but pg_indexes is forgotting about partitioned indexes. So this >> is a good thing to add. > > +1 I'll go commit something close to what Suraj is proposing if there are no objections from others. At least we agree on that part ;) >> I am less sure about that as partitioned relations do not have a >> physical presence. > > Hmm, although most of the fields of pg_stat_user_tables would be NULL or 0 > for partitioned tables/indexes, values of at least some of the fields of > pg_stat_user_tables, like last_vacuum, last_analyze, etc., might be useful > to users. Also, we cannot assume that these views will continue to be > mostly useless as far as partitioned relations are concerned. Well, when VACUUM or ANALYZE list a partitioned table what the processing does is to decompose partitioned tables into a list of actual relations it can work on, and it never processes the partitioned parts, so last_vacuum & friends remain set at 0/NULL. We had a similar discussion about that a couple of months ago, and it was not really clear to me how it is possible to define aggregates for partitioned tables when analyzing them, and if stat tables should show them or not: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/152922564661.24801.3078728743990100...@wrigleys.postgresql.org Listing only NULL/0 is also confusing I think because this would mean for the end-user that VACUUM and/or ANALYZE have never been run for a given relation. pg_partition_tree has been added since then, so compiling stats has become easier for full partition trees, the documentation could be improved on that point perhaps. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information.
Hi, On 2018/12/15 8:00, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 05:21:49PM +0530, Suraj Kharage wrote: >> There are some catalog views which do not show the partitioned table and >> its index entry. >> One of them is "pg_indexes" which failed to show the partitioned index. >> Attached the patch which fixes the same. > > I tend to agree with your comment here. pg_tables lists partitioned > tables, but pg_indexes is forgotting about partitioned indexes. So this > is a good thing to add. +1 >> Other views such as pg_stat*,pg_statio_* has the same problem for >> partitioned tables and indexes. >> Since the partitioned tables and its indexes considered as a dummy, they do >> not have any significance in stat tables, >> can we still consider adding relkind=p in these pg_stat_* views? Thoughts? > > I am less sure about that as partitioned relations do not have a > physical presence. Hmm, although most of the fields of pg_stat_user_tables would be NULL or 0 for partitioned tables/indexes, values of at least some of the fields of pg_stat_user_tables, like last_vacuum, last_analyze, etc., might be useful to users. Also, we cannot assume that these views will continue to be mostly useless as far as partitioned relations are concerned. Thanks, Amit
Re: Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 05:21:49PM +0530, Suraj Kharage wrote: > There are some catalog views which do not show the partitioned table and > its index entry. > One of them is "pg_indexes" which failed to show the partitioned index. > Attached the patch which fixes the same. I tend to agree with your comment here. pg_tables lists partitioned tables, but pg_indexes is forgotting about partitioned indexes. So this is a good thing to add. > Other views such as pg_stat*,pg_statio_* has the same problem for > partitioned tables and indexes. > Since the partitioned tables and its indexes considered as a dummy, they do > not have any significance in stat tables, > can we still consider adding relkind=p in these pg_stat_* views? Thoughts? I am less sure about that as partitioned relations do not have a physical presence. -- Michael signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Catalog views failed to show partitioned table information.
Hi, There are some catalog views which do not show the partitioned table and its index entry. One of them is "pg_indexes" which failed to show the partitioned index. Attached the patch which fixes the same. Other views such as pg_stat*,pg_statio_* has the same problem for partitioned tables and indexes. Since the partitioned tables and its indexes considered as a dummy, they do not have any significance in stat tables, can we still consider adding relkind=p in these pg_stat_* views? Thoughts? Regards, Suraj pg_indexes_fix_for_partition_index.patch Description: Binary data
