| From: | Alexander Kuzmenkov <a(dot)kuzmenkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rangejoin rebased |
| Date: | 2018-03-02 16:12:25 |
| Message-ID: | b78f5c6c-e7c5-b3a3-d56a-778f33c0b277@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 16.01.2018 10:49, Jeff Davis wrote:
> My proposed fix is to make an internal opfamily identical to the
> external one, such that it's not recognized as part of the same EC,
> and the planner won't try to eliminate it. It loses out on potential
> optimizations, but those are mostly theoretical since the btree
> opclass ordering for ranges is not very interesting to a user.
I think I figured out what to do with missing sort directions. We can
change select_outer_pathkeys_for_merge() to generate the pathkeys we
need. Also, find_mergeclauses_for_outer_pathkeys() has to be changed
too, so that it knows which pathkeys are compatible to which range join
clauses.
About the patch, do I understand it right that you are working on the
next version now?
--
Alexander Kuzmenkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikolay Shaplov | 2018-03-02 16:12:58 | Re: [PATCH] Opclass parameters |
| Previous Message | Mark Wong | 2018-03-02 16:12:03 | Re: [GSOC 18] Performance Farm Project |