Re: Missing MaterialPath support in reparameterize_path_by_child

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Missing MaterialPath support in reparameterize_path_by_child
Date: 2022-12-06 14:52:51
Message-ID: 3615862.1670338371@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:13 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I don't especially like "rel->nparts = 0" as a way of disabling
>> partitionwise join ...

> ... If we can not generate AppendPath for a
> join relation, it means there is no way to compute child join
> relations and thus the relation is not partitioned. So setting
> rel->nparts = 0 is right.

If we had nparts > 0 before, then it is partitioned for some value
of "partitioned", so I don't entirely buy this argument.

> Probably we should add macros similar to
> dummy relation for marking and checking partitioned relation. I see
> IS_PARTITIONED_RELATION() is defined already. Maybe we could add
> mark_(un)partitioned_rel().

Hiding it behind a macro with an explanatory name would be an
improvement, for sure.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dong Wook Lee 2022-12-06 15:00:26 Re: old_snapshot: add test for coverage
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-12-06 14:42:17 Re: Error-safe user functions