| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: why partition pruning doesn't work? |
| Date: | 2018-07-16 01:12:30 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZmLY7=b4_ry1OiRAha+aTg8FqScc0D3Ju2Z5_DT0KndQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 8:24 PM, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> +1. In fact, maybe we ought to go a little further and have a
>> relation_reopen(oid, mode) that verifies that a lock in the specified
>> mode is held.
>
> Wouldn't it be better to just store the Relation indexed by its relid
> somewhere the first time we opened it? Then just do a direct array
> lookup on that rather than looking up by hashtable in syscache?
Yes, that would be better, IMHO anyway.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2018-07-16 01:40:42 | Make foo=null a warning by default. |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2018-07-16 00:55:52 | Re: Internal error XX000 with enable_partition_pruning=on, pg 11 beta1 on Debian |