On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 3:06 PM Pavel Borisov <pashkin.e...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 at 15:55, Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, Pavel! >> >> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 1:48 PM Pavel Borisov <pashkin.e...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 at 02:24, Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 6:57 PM Dmitry Koval <d.ko...@postgrespro.ru> >> >> wrote: >> >> > > Probably >> >> > > QueryCompletion struct fits this purpose best from the existing >> >> > > parameters. Attached draft patch implements returning oid of newly >> >> > > created relation as part of QueryCompletion. Thoughts? >> >> > >> >> > I agree, returning the oid of the newly created relation is the best way >> >> > to solve the problem. >> >> > (Excuse me, I won't have access to a laptop for the next week - and >> >> > won't be able to look at the source code). >> >> >> >> Thank you for your feedback. Although, I decided QueryCompletion is >> >> not a good place for this new field. It looks more appropriate to >> >> place it to TableLikeClause, which already contains one relation oid >> >> inside. The revised patch is attached. >> > >> > >> > I've looked at the patch v2. Remembering the OID of a relation newly >> > created with LIKE in TableLikeClause seems good to me. >> > Check-world passes sucessfully. >> >> Thank you. >> >> > Shouldn't we also modify the TableLikeClause node in gram.y accordingly? >> >> On the one hand, makeNode() uses palloc0() and initializes all fields >> with zero anyway. On the other hand, there is already assignment of >> relationOid. So, yes I'll add assignment of newRelationOid for the >> sake of uniformity. >> >> > For the comments: >> > Put the Oid -> Store the OID >> >> > so caller might use it -> for the caller to use it. >> >> Accepted. >> >> > (Maybe also caller -> table create function) >> >> I'll prefer to leave it "caller" as more generic term, which could >> also fit potential future usages. >> >> The revised patch is attached. I'm going to push it if no objections. > > Looked at v3 > All good except the patch has "Oid" and "OID" in two comments. I suppose > "OID" is preferred elsewhere in the PG comments.
Correct, the same file contains "OID" multiple times. Revised version is attached. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov Supabase
v4-0001-Avoid-repeated-table-name-lookups-in-createPartit.patch
Description: Binary data
