|From:||Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|To:||David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|Subject:||Re: executor relation handling|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2018/09/28 17:21, David Rowley wrote:
> On 28 September 2018 at 20:00, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I've made minor tweaks, which find in
>> the attached updated patches (a .diff file containing changes from v6 to
>> v7 is also attached).
> Thanks for looking over the changes.
> I've looked at the v6 to v7 diff and it seems all good, apart from:
> + * The following asserts that the necessary lock on the relation
> I think we maybe should switch the word "assert" for "verifies". The
> Assert is just checking we didn't get a NoLock and I don't think
> you're using "assert" meaning the Assert() marco, so likely should be
> changed to avoid confusion.
Okay, I've revised the text in the attached updated patch.
> Apart from that, I see nothing wrong with the patches, so I think we
> should get someone else to look. I'm marking it as ready for
Thanks for your time reviewing the patches.
|Next Message||Yamaji, Ryo||2018-09-28 08:45:22||RE: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization|
|Previous Message||David Rowley||2018-09-28 08:26:32||Re: [HACKERS] Removing LEFT JOINs in more cases|