Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Дата
Msg-id 20180405223512.euhn52qm7bcqp2hy@alvherre.pgsql
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Список pgsql-hackers
I seems pretty clear that putting get_matching_partitions() in
catalog/partition.c is totally the wrong thing; it belongs wholly in
partprune. I think the reason you put it there is that it requires
access to a lot of internals that are static in partition.c.  In the
attached not yet cleaned version of the patch, I have moved a whole lot
of what you added to partition.c to partprune.c; and for the functions
and struct declarations that were required to make it work, I created
catalog/partition_internal.h.

I changed a lot of code also, but cosmetic changes only.

I'll clean this up a bit more now, and try to commit shortly (or early
tomorrow); wanted to share current status now in case I have to rush
out.

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

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Gierth
Дата:
Сообщение: Checkpoint not retrying failed fsync?
Следующее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Removing useless DISTINCT clauses