From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Douglas Doole <dougdoole(at)gmail(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Push limit to sort through a subquery |
Date: | 2017-08-25 14:58:41 |
Message-ID: | 406.1503673121@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> it would be stupid to put a filter on that node rather than its
>> children, but I see this in both nodeGather.c and nodeGatherMerge.c:
>>
>> gatherstate->ps.qual =
>> ExecInitQual(node->plan.qual, (PlanState *) gatherstate);
>>
>> It doesn't look like the qual is actually used anywhere in either node
>> type. Am I right in thinking this is dead code?
> I also think so. I think this was required in some initial versions
> of gather node patch where we were thinking of having a single node
> (instead of what we have now that Gather node and beneath there will
> be partial scan node) to perform parallel scans.
Thanks for confirming. I'll replace that with something like
Assert(!node->plan.qual). I have some other code-review-ish
fixes to do in nodeGatherMerge, too.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-08-25 15:11:28 | Re: [PATCH] Push limit to sort through a subquery |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-25 14:46:43 | Re: [PATCH] Push limit to sort through a subquery |