| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join |
| Date: | 2018-06-28 05:53:40 |
| Message-ID: | 41bc9c9a-75df-21bf-8ebc-7f2d351738f1@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/06/27 22:21, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Amit Langote
>> Ah, okay. I thought of reporting this because I felt the errors may have
>> to do with changes to the related code in HEAD between May 14 when you
>> last posted the patches and today that you may need to account for in you
>> patches. For instance, there are many diffs like this:
>>
>> Looks like the Result node on top of Append is no longer there after
>> applying your patch.
>
> Yes. They are coming because of a commit which removed Result node on
> top of an Append node. I don't remember exactly which.
>
> I wouldn't worry about those diffs at this time. As I have mentioned
> in earlier mails, the expected output from 0006 is quite large and is
> not supposed to be committed. So, I don't see much value in fixing the
> plans in that output.
>
> Do you see that as a hindrance in reviewing the code changes and tests in 0005?
I think not. I'll ignore 0006 for now and focus on other patches.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rajkumar Raghuwanshi | 2018-06-28 06:21:23 | Re: alter index WITH ( storage_parameter = value [, ... ] ) for partition index. |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-06-28 05:49:22 | Re: partition tree inspection functions |