From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Prologue of set_append_rel_size() and partitioned tables |
Date: | 2017-03-29 06:53:53 |
Message-ID: | 3d3a8540-daba-d819-2b9f-9f9fe638d741@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/03/29 15:20, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> The prologue of set_append_rel_size() mentions
>
> * .... Note that in the inheritance case,
> * the first member relation is actually the same table as is mentioned in
> * the parent RTE ... but it has a different RTE and RelOptInfo.
>
> This isn't true about partitioned tables anymore. We do not create
> RelOptInfo of the partitioned table and thus is not first member
> relation.
My bad.
> We could argue that inheritance in case of partitioned
> tables is just an implementation detail and partitioned table is not
> "inherited" in true sense. So "inheritance case" referred to here does
> not cover partitioning and so the sentence still holds. But I guess,
> this needs some change so that we do not expect first member to be
> same as partitioned table. I am not able to craft an elegant sentence
> but how about something like attached?
I think we *should* update the comment somwhow. Since now there are a few
places using "non-partitioned inheritance" to refer to regular parent
tables, why not use that term here too? So:
* The passed-in rel and RTE represent the entire append relation. The
- * relation's contents are computed by appending together the output of
- * the individual member relations. Note that in the inheritance case,
- * the first member relation is actually the same table as is mentioned in
- * the parent RTE ... but it has a different RTE and RelOptInfo. This is
+ * relation's contents are computed by appending together the output of the
+ * individual member relations. Note that in the non-partitioned inheritance
+ * case, the first member relation is actually the same table as is mentioned
+ * in the parent RTE ... but it has a different RTE and RelOptInfo. This is
Update patch attached.
Thanks,
Amit
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
set_append_rel_size_prologue-v2.patch | text/x-diff | 1.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kang Yuzhe | 2017-03-29 07:17:50 | Re: On How To Shorten the Steep Learning Curve Towards PG Hacking... |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2017-03-29 06:40:20 | Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode |