| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, digoal(at)126(dot)com, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #16302: too many range table entries - when count partition table(65538 childs) |
| Date: | 2020-03-20 02:21:53 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoayf1Ka1-OqL=BUCozNi88_zKCDc94qY4Gus8uRUg+a0A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:33 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > You could make INNER_VAR -1 and so on. Then it would probably break
> > quite clearly if it's not signedness clean.
>
> I kinda like this, because it'd avoid having random large constants
> in the code.
>
> We'd have to change Var.varno and some other places from Index to
> plain int, or else invent a typedef --- but the number of places
> currently using plain int for this sort of purpose is very large,
> so probably a new typedef is not worth the hassle.
Honestly, having typedef int RangeTableIndex seems pretty appealing to
me. OK, maybe there aren't that many places, but it would make it a
lot more greppable, which seems pretty nice.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2020-03-20 19:26:18 | BUG #16309: Postgres's ISO 8601 date output is not compliant |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-03-19 17:42:57 | Re: Trigger does not work after partitioning |