| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: reorganizing partitioning code |
| Date: | 2018-03-28 21:09:07 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobbV4oWgW+ppVMxasiFVD4kkw-14=0GX-DyqKD2s+E2ew@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:07 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> On 2018/03/22 11:45, Amit Langote wrote:
>> FWIW, I did manage to rebase it this morning and posting it here.
>
> Rebased again.
>
> I started wondering if we should separate out stuff related to partition
> bounds. That is create a utils/partbound.h and put PartitionBoundInfo and
> related comparison and search functions into a utils/adt/partbound.c. I
> had started thinking about that when I looked at the code added by the
> patch submitted on the "advanced partition matching algorithm for
> partition-wise join" thread [1]. I haven't done anything about that though.
adt = Abstract Data Type, which I think we've interpreted up until now
to mean an SQL-visible data type, so that seems like an odd choice.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2018-03-28 21:23:09 | Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-03-28 21:01:20 | Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions |