From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables |
Date: | 2017-10-04 04:37:42 |
Message-ID: | 163f9f69-563a-6d03-3e51-2e41703c28dc@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/10/04 4:27, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Regarding nomenclature and my previous griping about wisdom, I was
>>> wondering about just calling this a "partition join" like you have in
>>> the regression test. So the GUC would be enable_partition_join, you'd
>>> have generate_partition_join_paths(), etc. Basically just delete
>>> "wise" throughout.
>>
>> Partition-wise join is standard term used in literature and in
>> documentation of other popular DBMSes, so partition_wise makes more
>> sense. But I am fine with partition_join as well. Do you want it
>> partition_join or partitionjoin like enable_mergejoin/enable_hashjoin
>> etc.?
>
> Well, you're making me have second thoughts. It's really just that
> partition_wise looks a little awkward to me, and maybe that's not
> enough reason to change anything. I suppose if I commit it this way
> and somebody really hates it, it can always be changed later. We're
> not getting a lot of input from anyone else at the moment.
FWIW, the name enable_partition_join seems enough to convey the core
feature, that is, I see "_wise" as redundant, even though I'm now quite
used to seeing "_wise" in the emails here and saying it out loud every now
and then. Ashutosh may have a point though that users coming from other
databases might miss the "_wise". :)
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-10-04 06:20:51 | Re: PATCH: pgbench - option to build using ppoll() for larger connection counts |
Previous Message | Wong, Yi Wen | 2017-10-04 03:43:00 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |