| 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: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Speeding up INSERTs and UPDATEs to partitioned tables |
| Date: | 2018-10-05 12:55:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f_Vt8q2WYSKBwZR0ucuCTXDz0uZh_EUMWQHOqe8EcVyig@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 17 September 2018 at 21:15, David Rowley
<david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> v9 patch attached. Fixes conflict with 6b78231d.
v10 patch attached. Fixes conflict with cc2905e9.
I'm not so sure we need to zero the partition_tuple_slots[] array at
all since we always set a value there is there's a corresponding map
stored. I considered pulling that out, but in the end, I didn't as I
saw some Asserts checking it's been properly set by checking the
element != NULL in nodeModifyTable.c and copy.c. Perhaps I should
have just gotten rid of those Asserts along with the palloc0 and
subsequent memset after the expansion of the array. I'm undecided.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v10-0001-Speed-up-INSERT-and-UPDATE-on-partitioned-tables.patch | application/octet-stream | 64.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-10-05 13:26:27 | Re: automatic restore point |
| Previous Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2018-10-05 12:22:49 | Re: partition tree inspection functions |