| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dmitry Koval <d(dot)koval(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix SPLIT PARTITION bound-overlap bug and other improvements |
| Date: | 2026-05-17 23:14:30 |
| Message-ID: | C0F7F893-D33E-4698-938E-612D08305CF6@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On May 18, 2026, at 05:45, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi, Chao!
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 9:59 AM Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> To make this patch easier to process, I split it into 4 commits:
>>
>> 0001 - Fixes the bound-overlap bug
>> 0002 - Fix the incorrect HINT message for the DEFAULT case
>> 0003 - Fix the incorrect description about combined bound in the SGML doc
>> 0004 - Reject only-create-default-partition usage
>
> Thank you for your work. I've revised the patchset.
> 0002 - I've also fixed gramma of hints in other branches
> 0004 - In the check_split_partition_not_same_bound(), calling
> partition_bounds_create() and partition_bounds_equal() looks a bit
> heavyweight. It doesn't matter much performance-wise, but it feels
> like start processing from scratch while we're on quite late stage
> already. I've replaced that with more lightweight check. Also I
> removed dealing with memory context. This code implies small
> non-repetitive memory allocations which only lives during DDL
> operation, no need to wrap them with memory context as we don't do so
> in other places.
>
> Any objections if I commit this?
>
> ------
> Regards,
> Alexander Korotkov
> Supabase
Hi Alexander,
Thanks for the revisions. I think you may have missed the attachments, so I cannot review the changes.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2026-05-17 23:29:30 | Re: (SQL/PGQ) cache lookup failed for label |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-05-17 22:43:34 | Re: Sequence Access Methods, round two |