Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification
Date: 2016-03-16 18:27:23
Message-ID: CA+TgmobugEwMLFgKPdK3=TqqkMmb2CXiU=NAXAZg-upaAp5kiA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> wrote:
> So, even though we don't need to define multiple hook declarations,
> I think the hook invocation is needed just after create_xxxx_paths()
> for each. It will need to inform extension the context of hook
> invocation, the argument list will take UpperRelationKind.

That actually seems like a pretty good point. Otherwise you can't
push anything from the upper rels down unless you are prepared to
handle all of it.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jesper Pedersen 2016-03-16 18:27:34 Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-03-16 18:25:52 Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little