Re: Performance regression with PostgreSQL 11 and partitioning

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Reiss <thomas(dot)reiss(at)dalibo(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance regression with PostgreSQL 11 and partitioning
Date: 2018-06-26 00:53:14
Message-ID: 22021.1529974394@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2018-Jun-18, David Rowley wrote:
>> I've attached a patch which cleans up my earlier version and moves the
>> setup of the append_rel_array into its own function instead of
>> sneaking code into setup_simple_rel_arrays(). I've also now updated
>> the comment above find_childrel_appendrelinfo(), which is now an
>> unused function.

> I checked that this patch fixes the originally reported performance
> regression.
> Unless there are objections, I intend to push this patch tomorrow.

If find_childrel_appendrelinfo is now unused, we should remove it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-06-26 00:58:11 Re: Incorrect fsync handling in pg_basebackup's tar_finish
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2018-06-25 23:50:11 Re: Scariest patch tournament, PostgreSQL 11 edition