Re: Record a Bitmapset of non-pruned partitions

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Record a Bitmapset of non-pruned partitions
Date: 2021-09-30 22:07:28
Message-ID: CAApHDvo7T-iDCbXbbkVSMPZ6ZK9UHtY32a-so+hVOzc1nHyu6w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 30 Sept 2021 at 20:25, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Related to the above, I noticed while looking at
> build_merged_partition_bounds() that db632fbca3 missed adding a line
> to that function to set interleaved_parts to NULL. Because the
> PartitionBoundInfo is only palloc'd (not palloc0'd), interleaved_parts
> of a "merged" bounds struct ends up pointing to garbage, so let's fix
> that. Attached a patch.

Thanks for the patch.

I think we also need to document that interleaved_parts is not set for
join relations, otherwise someone may in the future try to use that
field for an optimisation for join relations. At the moment, per
generate_orderedappend_paths, we only handle IS_SIMPLE_REL type
relations.

I've attached a patch that updates the comments to mention this.

David

Attachment Content-Type Size
initialize-inteleaved_parts_v2.patch application/octet-stream 1.3 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chapman Flack 2021-09-30 22:26:08 Re: Reserve prefixes for loaded libraries proposal
Previous Message Florin Irion 2021-09-30 21:54:04 Reserve prefixes for loaded libraries proposal