Re: A bug in mapping attributes in ATExecAttachPartition()

From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: A bug in mapping attributes in ATExecAttachPartition()
Date: 2017-09-14 04:59:55
Message-ID: a83a0899-19f5-594c-9aac-3ba0f16989a1@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2017/08/07 11:05, Amit Langote wrote:
> By the way, bulk of 0004 is refactoring which it seems is what Jeevan's
> default partition patch set also includes as one of the patches [1]. It
> got a decent amount review from Ashutosh. I broke it down into a separate
> patch, so that the patch to add the new feature is its own tiny patch.
>
> I also spotted a couple of comments referring to attachRel that we just
> recently renamed.
>
> So, attached are:
>
> 0001: s/attachRel/attachrel/g
> 0002: Refactoring to introduce a PartConstraintImpliedByRelConstraint
> 0003: Add the feature to skip the scan of individual leaf partitions

Since Jeevan Ladhe mentioned this patch [1] earlier this week, sending the
rebased patches here for consideration. Actually there are only 2 patches
now, because 0002 above is rendered unnecessary by ecfe59e50fb [2].

Thanks,
Amit

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOgcT0MWwG8WBw8frFMtRYHAgDD=tpt6U7WcsO_L2k0KYpm4Jg@mail.gmail.com

[2] https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=ecfe59e50fb

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Typo-attachRel-is-now-attachrel.patch text/plain 1.1 KB
0002-Teach-ATExecAttachPartition-to-skip-validation-in-mo.patch text/plain 4.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-09-14 05:01:23 Re: Optimise default partition scanning while adding new partition
Previous Message Rafia Sabih 2017-09-14 04:42:59 Re: utility commands benefiting from parallel plan