On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 9:15 PM Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 4:16 PM Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 12/5/20 10:38 PM, Andy Fan wrote: >> > Currently the UniqueKey is defined as a List of Expr, rather than >> > EquivalenceClasses. >> > A complete discussion until now can be found at [1] (The messages I replied >> > to also >> > care a lot and the information is completed). This patch has stopped at >> > this place for >> > a while, I'm planning to try EquivalenceClasses, but any suggestion would >> > be welcome. >> > >> > >> >> Unfortunately I think we need a RfC style patch of both versions in >> their minimum implementation. >> >> Hopefully this will make it easier for one or more committers to decide >> on the right direction since they can do a side-by-side comparison of >> the two solutions. >> > > I do get the exact same idea. Actually I have made EquivalenceClasses > works with baserel last weekend and then I realized it is hard to compare > the 2 situations without looking into the real/Poc code, even for very > experienced people. I will submit a new patch after I get the partitioned > relation, subquery works. Hope I can make it in one week.
Status update for a commitfest entry.
Are you planning to submit a new patch? Or is there any blocker for this work? This patch entry on CF app has been in state Waiting on Author for a while. If there is any update on that, please reflect on CF app.
I agree that the current status is "Waiting on author", and no block issue for others.
I plan to work on this in 1 month. I have to get my current urgent case completed first.
Sorry for the delay action and thanks for asking.
I'd start to continue this work today. At the same time, I will split the multi-patch series
into some dedicated small chunks for easier review. The first one is just for adding a