|From:||Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>|
|To:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: non-bulk inserts and tuple routing|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2018/03/03 13:48, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-02-22 11:10:57 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:06 PM, Amit Langote
>> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>>>> Attached is an updated version for that.
>>> Thanks for updating the patch.
>> Committed with a few changes. The big one was that I got rid of the
>> local variable is_update in ExecSetupPartitionTupleRouting. That
>> saved a level of indentation on a substantial chunk of code, and it
>> turns out that test was redundant anyway.
> Btw, are there cases where this could change explain output? If there's
> subplan references or such in any of returning / wcte expressions,
> they'd not get added at explain time. It's probably fine because add
> the expressions also "staticly" in ExecInitModifyTable()?
Yes, I think.
Afaics, explain.c only looks at the information that is "statically" added
to ModifyTableState by ExecInitModifyTable. It considers information
added by the tuple routing code only when printing information about
invoked triggers, that too, only in the case of EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
|Next Message||Thomas Munro||2018-03-05 04:32:09||Re: JIT compiling with LLVM v11|
|Previous Message||David Rowley||2018-03-05 03:51:20||Re: Parallel Aggregates for string_agg and array_agg|