Hi, On Tue, Dec 2, 2025 at 9:04 AM Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 04:43:37PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: > > I tried to move the partitioning-related code to a new file, and it wasn't > > too bad. Note that there are a couple of internal-to-tablecmds.c things > > that need to be exported. Besides that, the attached patch is still pretty > > rough, and I'm not sure I correctly placed the line in the sand when > > determining what stays and what goes, but this at least shows the general > > shape of what's needed. (BTW git was generating an atrocious diff for > > tablecmds.c. You might need to set the diff algorithm to "minimal" if you > > are similarly affected.)
+1 to splitting tablecmds.c at long last. (I suppose I or someone could’ve proposed that back in Dec 2016 :-). We did create src/backend/partitioning in v11 to move code from then big catalog/partition.c, but this one has stayed untouched since then. Better late than never.) > Moving all the partition-specific code into a different file makes > sense here. Is partcmds.c as name the best fit though? Perhaps a > tablecmds_partition.c, with other files named tablecmds_popo.c to > indicate the sub-systems formerly in tablecmds.c? As Andres mentioned, it’s good to avoid slicing too granularly, but I also thought of the name tablecmds_partition.c as soon as I saw “split tablecmds.c” and “partitioning code.” That seems a reasonable first cut. > > src/backend/commands/Makefile | 1 + > > src/backend/commands/meson.build | 1 + > > src/backend/commands/partcmds.c | 3377 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c | 3456 > > +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > src/backend/partitioning/partbounds.c | 1 + > > src/include/commands/partcmds.h | 53 ++ > > src/include/commands/tablecmds.h | 134 +++- > > 7 files changed, 3575 insertions(+), 3448 deletions(-) > > The new contents of tablecmds.h don't have any strong dependency with > tablecmds.h, so perhaps having the "internal" structures like the ones > you are moving here into a new tablecmds_internal.h would be cleaner? +1 to introducing tablecmds_internal.h as well. > Another sub-area of tablecmds.c that could be split is I think the > rewrite logic. It has a lot of its own perks that become harder to > figure out the more tablecmds.c gets bloated. +1 on splitting out the rewrite logic separately too. -- Thanks, Amit Langote
