| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marina Polyakova <m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |
| Date: | 2018-05-09 02:31:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f8s5f=atOHtD+g5L4qNCbpRi0p88NRJ-rh7Ln2AMb8nHw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9 May 2018 at 14:29, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> On 2018/05/09 11:20, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> While looking at this code, is there any reason to not make
>> gen_partprune_steps static? This is only used in partprune.c for now,
>> so the intention is to make it available for future patches?
>
> Yeah, making it static might be a good idea. I had made it externally
> visible, because I was under the impression that the runtime pruning
> related code would want to call it from elsewhere within the planner.
> But, instead it introduced a make_partition_pruneinfo() which in turn
> calls get_partprune_steps.
Yeah. Likely left over from when run-time pruning was generating the
steps during execution rather than during planning.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2018-05-09 02:52:32 | RE: Having query cache in core |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-05-09 02:29:32 | Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |