Re: Unnecessary smgropen in {heapam_relation,index}_copy_data?
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unnecessary smgropen in {heapam_relation,index}_copy_data? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 30b03b9f-a1f4-48da-b56d-1d7dd476cbea@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Unnecessary smgropen in {heapam_relation,index}_copy_data? (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 25/01/2024 17:22, Japin Li wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 21:43, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> wrote: >>> I find heapam_relation_copy_data() and index_copy_data() have the following code: >>> >>> dstrel = smgropen(*newrlocator, rel->rd_backend); >>> >>> ... >>> >>> RelationCreateStorage(*newrlocator, rel->rd_rel->relpersistence, true); >>> >>> The smgropen() is also called by RelationCreateStorage(), why should we call >>> smgropen() explicitly here? >>> >>> I try to remove the smgropen(), and all tests passed. >> >> That's a very good question. Note that the second argument of >> smgropen() used to create dstrel changes after applying your patch. >> I'm not 100% sure whether this is significant or not. > > Thanks for the review. > > According the comments of RelationData->rd_backend, it is the backend id, if > the relation is temporary. The differnece is RelationCreateStorage() uses > relpersistence to determinate the backend id. Committed, thanks! -- Heikki Linnakangas Neon (https://neon.tech)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: