partition -> partitioned

Started by Amit Langotealmost 8 years ago9 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp

Hi.

Commit 499be013de6 used 'partition' where it really meant 'partitioned' in
a few places including in a variable name. For example, what almost all
places call 'partitioned_rels', make_partition_pruneinfo called
'partition_rels'.

Attached a patch to make that uniform to avoid confusion.

Thanks,
Amit

Attachments:

use-partitioned-not-partition.patchtext/plain; charset=UTF-8; name=use-partitioned-not-partition.patchDownload+8-7
#2David Rowley
dgrowleyml@gmail.com
In reply to: Amit Langote (#1)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 17 May 2018 at 13:52, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Commit 499be013de6 used 'partition' where it really meant 'partitioned' in
a few places including in a variable name. For example, what almost all
places call 'partitioned_rels', make_partition_pruneinfo called
'partition_rels'.

Attached a patch to make that uniform to avoid confusion.

Looks good to me.

--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

#3Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: David Rowley (#2)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 2018/05/17 11:40, David Rowley wrote:

On 17 May 2018 at 13:52, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Commit 499be013de6 used 'partition' where it really meant 'partitioned' in
a few places including in a variable name. For example, what almost all
places call 'partitioned_rels', make_partition_pruneinfo called
'partition_rels'.

Attached a patch to make that uniform to avoid confusion.

Looks good to me.

Thanks for taking a look at it.

Regards,
Amit

#4Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Amit Langote (#3)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 2018/05/17 11:48, Amit Langote wrote:

On 2018/05/17 11:40, David Rowley wrote:

On 17 May 2018 at 13:52, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Commit 499be013de6 used 'partition' where it really meant 'partitioned' in
a few places including in a variable name. For example, what almost all
places call 'partitioned_rels', make_partition_pruneinfo called
'partition_rels'.

Attached a patch to make that uniform to avoid confusion.

Looks good to me.

Thanks for taking a look at it.

Did this perhaps get forgotten?

Thanks,
Amit

#5Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Amit Langote (#4)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 2018/06/19 17:51, Amit Langote wrote:

On 2018/05/17 11:48, Amit Langote wrote:

On 2018/05/17 11:40, David Rowley wrote:

On 17 May 2018 at 13:52, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

Commit 499be013de6 used 'partition' where it really meant 'partitioned' in
a few places including in a variable name. For example, what almost all
places call 'partitioned_rels', make_partition_pruneinfo called
'partition_rels'.

Attached a patch to make that uniform to avoid confusion.

Looks good to me.

Thanks for taking a look at it.

Did this perhaps get forgotten?

Noticed that the relevant code changed, so I rebased the patch. Also,
made a minor update to a nearby comment.

Thanks,
Amit

Attachments:

use-partitioned-not-partition-v2.patchtext/plain; charset=UTF-8; name=use-partitioned-not-partition-v2.patchDownload+10-9
#6Michael Paquier
michael@paquier.xyz
In reply to: Amit Langote (#5)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 06:02:22PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:

Noticed that the relevant code changed, so I rebased the patch. Also,
made a minor update to a nearby comment.

That looks right to me as we speak about non-leaf partitions here.
Alvaro, as 499be013 is yours, would you fix this inconsistency or should
I? I could understand why things are confusing on HEAD, "partitioned"
and "partition" have opposite meanings.
--
Michael

#7Alvaro Herrera
alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
In reply to: Michael Paquier (#6)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 2018-Jun-20, Michael Paquier wrote:

On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 06:02:22PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:

Noticed that the relevant code changed, so I rebased the patch. Also,
made a minor update to a nearby comment.

That looks right to me as we speak about non-leaf partitions here.
Alvaro, as 499be013 is yours, would you fix this inconsistency or should
I? I could understand why things are confusing on HEAD, "partitioned"
and "partition" have opposite meanings.

Hmm, will look.

--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

#8Alvaro Herrera
alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
In reply to: Amit Langote (#5)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 2018-Jun-19, Amit Langote wrote:

Noticed that the relevant code changed, so I rebased the patch. Also,
made a minor update to a nearby comment.

Pushed, thanks. I made a couple of comments one or two words shorter
while (IMO) not losing clarity.

--
�lvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

#9Amit Langote
Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp
In reply to: Alvaro Herrera (#8)
Re: partition -> partitioned

On 2018/06/21 0:45, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

On 2018-Jun-19, Amit Langote wrote:

Noticed that the relevant code changed, so I rebased the patch. Also,
made a minor update to a nearby comment.

Pushed, thanks. I made a couple of comments one or two words shorter
while (IMO) not losing clarity.

Thank you.

Regards,
Amit