From: | Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Floris Van Nee <florisvannee(at)optiver(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, "rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com" <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Keeps tracking the uniqueness with UniqueKey |
Date: | 2021-01-24 10:26:33 |
Message-ID: | CAKU4AWpTHunBVBt_nCPPohRYR2xq6rMQaxP+uxoqNnmyCGv64w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Masahiko:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 9:15 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 9:15 PM Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 4:16 PM Jesper Pedersen <
> jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 12/5/20 10:38 PM, Andy Fan wrote:
> >> > Currently the UniqueKey is defined as a List of Expr, rather than
> >> > EquivalenceClasses.
> >> > A complete discussion until now can be found at [1] (The messages I
> replied
> >> > to also
> >> > care a lot and the information is completed). This patch has stopped
> at
> >> > this place for
> >> > a while, I'm planning to try EquivalenceClasses, but any suggestion
> would
> >> > be welcome.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Unfortunately I think we need a RfC style patch of both versions in
> >> their minimum implementation.
> >>
> >> Hopefully this will make it easier for one or more committers to decide
> >> on the right direction since they can do a side-by-side comparison of
> >> the two solutions.
> >>
> >
> > I do get the exact same idea. Actually I have made EquivalenceClasses
> > works with baserel last weekend and then I realized it is hard to compare
> > the 2 situations without looking into the real/Poc code, even for very
> > experienced people. I will submit a new patch after I get the
> partitioned
> > relation, subquery works. Hope I can make it in one week.
>
> Status update for a commitfest entry.
>
> Are you planning to submit a new patch? Or is there any blocker for
> this work? This patch entry on CF app has been in state Waiting on
> Author for a while. If there is any update on that, please reflect on
> CF app.
>
>
> I agree that the current status is "Waiting on author", and no block
issue for others.
I plan to work on this in 1 month. I have to get my current urgent case
completed first.
Sorry for the delay action and thanks for asking.
--
Best Regards
Andy Fan (https://www.aliyun.com/)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andy Fan | 2021-01-24 10:34:26 | Extend more usecase for planning time partition pruning and init partition pruning. |
Previous Message | Mark Rofail | 2021-01-24 10:21:33 | Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays |