From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, 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: | 2018-03-14 10:06:53 |
Message-ID: | 4ebb182c-3b78-5608-c036-6f0f234c518f@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/03/14 8:26, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> By the way, I checked whether patch 0002 (additional tests) had an
> effect on coverage, and couldn't detect any changes in terms of
> lines/functions. Were you able to find any bugs in your code thanks to
> the new tests that would not have been covered by existing tests?
All tests except those for hash partitioning got added as bugs were found
in the patch and fixed. As you may know, constraint exclusion doesn't
help with pruning hash partitions, so those tests don' exercise any
existing functionality but are there for the *new* code.
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-03-14 10:26:52 | Re: inserts into partitioned table may cause crash |
Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2018-03-14 09:02:51 | Re: Fixes for missing schema qualifications |