| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |
| Date: | 2018-02-28 01:12:07 |
| Message-ID: | 0f95f924-0efa-4cf5-eb5f-9a3d1bc3c33d@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/02/28 1:05, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:59 PM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> You may say that partition bounds might have to be different too in this
>> case and hence partition-wise join won't occur anyway, but I'm wondering
>> if the mismatch of partcollation itself isn't enough to conclude that?
>
> Yeah, you're right. I think that this is just a bug in partition-wise
> join, and that the partition scheme should just be using partcollation
> instead of parttypcoll, as in the attached.
Ah, OK. I was missing that there is no need to have both parttypcoll and
partcollation in PartitionSchemeData, as the Vars in rel->partexprs are
built from a bare PartitionKey (not PartitionSchemeData), and after that
point, parttypcoll no longer needs to kept around.
I noticed that there is a typo in the patch.
+ memcpy(part_scheme->partcollation, partkey->parttypcoll,
s/parttypcoll/partcollation/g
BTW, should there be a relevant test in partition_join.sql? If yes,
attached a patch (partitionwise-join-collation-test-1.patch) to add one.
Also attached updated version of your patch (fixed the typo).
Thanks,
Amit
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| partition-scheme-collation-2.patch | text/plain | 1.8 KB |
| partitionwise-join-collation-test-1.patch | text/plain | 2.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2018-02-28 01:22:44 | Re: Online enabling of checksums |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-02-28 01:08:59 | Re: Let's remove DSM_INPL_NONE. |