> > One thing that I'm tempted to add is more scans to check indisvalid
> > across these commands, particularly after the individual ATTACH
> > PARTITION bits on each individual index.

That works.

> > A second thing.  Do you think that it would be worth adding a
> > partitioned table that has no leaves in some portion of the test?  I
> > was thinking about a partitioned table called idxpart2 attached to
> > idxpart in the first part of the test.  I've found this pattern
> > usually useful for this area of the code when recursing with
> > validatePartitionedIndex() from a parent.

Good idea.

> Both things have been added to the tests, and applied the result down
> to v14.  The patch was able to apply cleanly across the board, without
> conflicts.  That's rare, these days..

Sorry for the late reply, and thanks for getting this committed!

--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)


Reply via email to