Hi, Pavel!
Thank you for your feedback. The revised patch set is attached.
I found that vacuum.c has a lot of heap-specific code. Thus, it
should be OK for analyze.c to keep heap-specific code. Therefore, I
rolled back the movement of functions between files. That leads to a
smaller patch, easier to review.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 2:52 PM Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The revised rest of the patchset is attached.
>> 0001 (was 0006) – I prefer the definition of AcquireSampleRowsFunc to
>> stay in vacuum.h. If we move it to sampling.h then we would have to
>> add there includes to define Relation, HeapTuple etc. I'd like to
>> avoid this kind of change. Also, I've deleted
>> table_beginscan_analyze(), because it's only called from
>> tableam-specific AcquireSampleRowsFunc. Also I put some comments to
>> heapam_scan_analyze_next_block() and heapam_scan_analyze_next_tuple()
>> given that there are now no relevant comments for them in tableam.h.
>> I've removed some redundancies from acquire_sample_rows(). And added
>> comments to AcquireSampleRowsFunc based on what we have in FDW docs
>> for this function. Did some small edits as well. As you suggested,
>> turned back declarations for acquire_sample_rows() and compare_rows().
>
>
> In my comment in the thread I was not thinking about returning the old name acquire_sample_rows(), it was only about
thedeclarations and the order of functions to be one code block. To me heapam_acquire_sample_rows() looks better for a
nameof heap implementation of *AcquireSampleRowsFunc(). I suggest returning the name heapam_acquire_sample_rows() from
v4.Sorry for the confusion in this.
I found that the function name acquire_sample_rows is referenced in
quite several places in the source code. So, I would prefer to save
the old name to keep the changes minimal.
> The changed type of static function that always returned true for heap looks good to me:
> static void heapam_scan_analyze_next_block
>
> The same is for removing the comparison of always true "block_accepted" in (heapam_)acquire_sample_rows()
Ok!
> Removing table_beginscan_analyze and call scan_begin() is not in the same style as other table_beginscan_* functions.
Thoughthis is not a change in functionality, I'd leave this part as it was in v4.
With the patch, this method doesn't have usages outside of table am.
I don't think we should keep a method, which doesn't have clear
external usage patterns. But I agree that starting a scan with
heap_beginscan() and ending with table_endscan() is not correct. Now
ending this scan with heap_endscan().
> Also, a comment about it was introduced in v5:
>
> src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c: * with table_beginscan_analyze()
Corrected.
> For comments I'd propose:
> %s/In addition, store estimates/In addition, a function should store estimates/g
> %s/zerp/zero/g
Fixed.
>> 0002 (was 0007) – I've turned the redundant "if", which you've pointed
>> out, into an assert. Also, added some comments, most notably comment
>> for TableAmRoutine.reloptions based on the indexam docs.
>
> %s/validate sthe/validates the/g
Fixed.
> This seems not needed, it's already inited to InvalidOid before.
> +else
> +accessMethod = default_table_access_method;
> + accessMethodId = InvalidOid;
>
> This code came from 374c7a22904. I don't insist on this simplification in a patch 0002.
This is minor redundancy. I prefer to keep it. This makes it obvious
that patch just moved this code.
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov