On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 at 16:35, David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 at 13:23, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > But wouldn't an even cheaper way here be to iterate over the children in > > reverse order when match_partition_order_desc? We can do that efficiently > > now. Looks like we don't have a readymade helper for it, but it'd be easy > > enough to add or open code. > > That seems fair. I think open coding is a better option. I had a go > at foreach_reverse recently and decided to keep clear of it due to > behavioural differences with foreach_delete_current().
I've pushed a patch for this now. Thank you for the idea. David
