| From: | Jim Vanns <james(dot)vanns(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nishant Sharma <nishant(dot)sharma(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Add support for SAOP in the optimizer for partial index paths |
| Date: | 2026-08-21 15:56:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+PSi_9tcNCsj+jDsn2SiCUsermQLSfpoO+H+rrLNtkzpGiRUg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Apologies for the long pause. I'll try to take on board your comments
when I next find a chance to contribute and fix up this merge request.
I've now missed the commitfest it was open for, so I'll have to
rebase/repush/reopen anyway.
And sorry for the top-posting (I just read those rules!), by MUA
defaults to it and I've done it for decades so it's a hard habit to
break!
In the meantime, if you were getting a whitespace error when applying
the patches, can I ask how you were doing that? I replayed mine given
the branch point commit ID and didn't see any errors.
Cheers,
Jim
On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 at 12:34, Nishant Sharma
<nishant(dot)sharma(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Jim for the patches!
>
> The topic is new to me. So, I thought I would review it to learn something.
>
> Here are some quick review comments:
> 0) You are top posting your emails/responses. You can find the details here - https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists#Email_etiquette_mechanics
>
> 1) Getting white space error when applying PATCH-1, PATCH-4, PATCH-5.
>
> 2) If you would like then both test cases changes can be merged into single patch. That is PATCH-2 & PATCH-3 as one.
>
> 3) Also, the fix (PATCH-4) and improvement(PATCH-5) that you have done can be directly be part of PATCH-1 itself, because they are changing your written function only. I think, no need to create separate patch for them. I think 1 code patch and 1 test patch should suffice.
>
> 4) Your if block of "if (to_remove != NULL)" has become dead code after applying PATCH-4. Where you removed "if (!clauseset.nonempty)" block which was assigning "to_remove". So, I think you should remove all its dead code.
>
> 5) While building "suitable_indexes" & "base_proof_clauses" (there are 2 such more in the patches) you have created a separate code block {} for it. I guess such style is rare in PG coding.
>
> 6) Should we use different name for #define MAX_SAOP_ARRAY_SIZE or make it common for both predtest.c & indxpath.c?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Nishant Sharma,
> EDB, Pune.
> https://www.enterprisedb.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-08-21 15:57:13 | Re: pgstat: Flush some statistics within running transactions, take 2 |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2026-08-21 15:47:49 | Re: toast table corrupted by vacuum - missing chunk number 0 for toast value |