| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Needless additional partition check in INSERT? |
| Date: | 2018-05-11 06:38:29 |
| Message-ID: | b011f268-58e8-75fb-ede9-71ba56584172@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/05/11 15:27, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That's really up to the patch
> author at the end (I prefer matching with NULL, but usually it is better
> to comply with the surroundings for consistency).
Yeah. I think in this case I'll have to withdraw my comment because most
places that check ri_PartitionRoot do *not* compare to NULL, so what's in
the David's patch is better left the way it is, if only for consistency.
Sorry about the noise.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hubert Zhang | 2018-05-11 07:01:56 | Re: Considering signal handling in plpython again |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-05-11 06:36:05 | Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |