From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp |
Cc: | hosoya(dot)yuzuko(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, thibaut(dot)madelaine(at)dalibo(dot)com, imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Problem with default partition pruning |
Date: | 2019-03-19 06:27:56 |
Message-ID: | 20190319.152756.202071463.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi.
At Mon, 18 Mar 2019 18:44:07 +0900, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote in <9bed6b79-f264-6976-b880-e2a5d23e9d85(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
> > v2 patch attached.
> > Could you please check it again?
>
> I think the updated patch breaks the promise that
> get_matching_range_bounds won't set scan_default based on individual
> pruning value comparisons. How about the attached delta patch that
> applies on top of your earlier v1 patch, which fixes the issue reported by
> Thibaut?
I read through the patch and understood how it works. And Amit's
proposal looks fine.
But that makes me think of scan_default as a wart.
The attached patch is a refactoring that removes scan_default
from PruneStepResult and the defaut partition is represented as
the same way as non-default partitions, without changing in
behavior. This improves the modularity of partprune code a bit.
The fix would be put on top of this easily.
Thoughts?
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
remove_scan_default_from_partprune.patch | text/x-patch | 18.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-19 06:29:10 | Re: pg_basebackup ignores the existing data directory permissions |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-19 06:25:17 | Re: Unaccent extension python script Issue in Windows |