Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Langote
Тема Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join
Дата
Msg-id 41bc9c9a-75df-21bf-8ebc-7f2d351738f1@lab.ntt.co.jp
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2018/06/27 22:21, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Amit Langote
>> Ah, okay.  I thought of reporting this because I felt the errors may have
>> to do with changes to the related code in HEAD between May 14 when you
>> last posted the patches and today that you may need to account for in you
>> patches.  For instance, there are many diffs like this:
>>
>> Looks like the Result node on top of Append is no longer there after
>> applying your patch.
> 
> Yes. They are coming because of a commit which removed Result node on
> top of an Append node. I don't remember exactly which.
> 
> I wouldn't worry about those diffs at this time. As I have mentioned
> in earlier mails, the expected output from 0006 is quite large and is
> not supposed to be committed. So, I don't see much value in fixing the
> plans in that output.
> 
> Do you see that as a hindrance in reviewing the code changes and tests in 0005?

I think not.  I'll ignore 0006 for now and focus on other patches.

Thanks,
Amit



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Langote
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: partition tree inspection functions
Следующее
От: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: alter index WITH ( storage_parameter = value [, ... ] ) forpartition index.