| From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Damir Ciganović-Janković <damir(dot)ciganovic(dot)jankovic(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15779: Partition elimination doesn't work as expected when using PARTITION BY RANGE |
| Date: | 2019-04-28 15:50:35 |
| Message-ID: | CA+HiwqGYYx3L80Qvtv-4tkeeeq315mjSuKSGqAejswqmwq6YSA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hi Damir,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 5:32 PM Damir Ciganović-Janković
<damir(dot)ciganovic(dot)jankovic(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> About those improvements you are mentioning, have you maybe alaready created a task/issue on them? So that I can track it and do the upgrade once the version with these improvements goes out
No, I haven't sent any proposal for that yet. Maybe you know, but
development is done by sending design proposals and associated patches
to the pgsql-hackers mailing list. The only way to track what's being
developed is to subscribe to that mailing list and follow discussion
threads of topics that are of interest to you. You're always welcome
to participate in those discussions if you have ideas, review comments
on the design, patches, etc.
I may propose improvements to the pruning logic when the next
development cycle begins a few months later. I don't know if I will
remember to reply here to remind you to follow the development.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Damir Ciganović-Janković | 2019-04-28 17:32:48 | Re: BUG #15779: Partition elimination doesn't work as expected when using PARTITION BY RANGE |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2019-04-28 11:14:33 | Re: BUG #15784: logical replication replicate data of type array for operation insert but update/delete/truncate |