On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 15:21, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 01:27:07PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Good catch. The patch looks good to me. > > While this patch is logically correct. I think that we should try to > not increase more the number of queries used to scan pg_class > depending on a list of relkinds. For example, did you notice that > your new Query_for_list_of_vacuumables becomes the same query as > Query_for_list_of_indexables?
Oh, I didn't realize that. Looking at target relation kinds for operations in-depth, I think that the relation list for index creation and the relation list for vacuum is different. Query_for_list_of_indexables should search for: RELKIND_RELATION RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE RELKIND_MATVIEW whereas Query_for_list_of_vacuumables should search for: RELKIND_RELATION RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE RELKIND_MATVIEW RELKIND_TOASTVALUE Also, Query_for_list_of_clusterables is further different from the above two lists. It should search for: RELKIND_RELATION RELKIND_MATVIEW RELKIND_TOASTVALUE Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
