|From:||"Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>|
|To:||'Amit Langote' <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|Cc:||David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||RE: speeding up planning with partitions|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
Thanks for the quick modification.
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 8:26 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
> > 1.
> > 5.
> > 0003: line 1620-1621
> > + * After creating the RelOptInfo for the given child RT index, it goes on to
> > + * initialize some of its fields base on the parent RelOptInfo.
> > s/fields base on/fields based on/
> Fixed all of 1-5.
Thanks for fixing.
> > 6.
> > parsenodes.h
> > 906 * inh is true for relation references that should be expanded to include
> > 907 * inheritance children, if the rel has any. This *must* be false for
> > 908 * RTEs other than RTE_RELATION entries.
> > I think inh can become true now even if RTEKind equals RTE_SUBQUERY, so latter
> > sentence need to be modified.
> Seems like an existing comment bug. Why don't you send a patch as you
> discovered it? :)
Thanks, I am pleased with your proposal. I'll post it as a small fix of the comment.
> > 7.
> > 0005: line 109-115
> Un-pruned partitions may become dummy due to contradictory constraints or
> constraint exclusion using normal CHECK constraints later and whether it's
> dummy is checked properly by functions that iterate over live_parts.
Ah, I understand partitions are eliminated contradictory constraints or
constraint exclusion, both using constraints.
> Attached updated patches. I have a few other changes in mind to make to
> 0001 such that the range table in each child's version of Query contains
> only that child table in place of the original target relation, instead of
> *all* child tables which is the current behavior. The current behavior
> makes range_table_mutator a big bottleneck when the number of un-pruned
> target children is large. But I'm saving it for the next week so that I
OK. I will continue the review of 0001 before/after your supplying of next
patch with keeping those in mind.
> can prepare for the PGConf.ASIA that's starting on Monday next week. See
> you there. :)
Yeah, see you there. :)
|Next Message||Michael Paquier||2018-12-07 01:04:06||pg_partition_tree crashes for a non-defined relation|
|Previous Message||Michael Paquier||2018-12-07 00:39:43||Re: Hint and detail punctuation|