Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: generic plans and "initial" pruning
Date: 2022-03-31 11:11:54
Message-ID: CA+HiwqEp6CssT00wiJxTVO_d6nrsmpsM8doOkOHmC5=vN3dHCg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 6:55 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> I'm looking at 0001 here with intention to commit later. I see that
> there is some resistance to 0004, but I think a final verdict on that
> one doesn't materially affect 0001.

Thanks.

While the main goal of the refactoring patch is to make it easier to
review the more complex changes that 0004 makes to execPartition.c, I
agree it has merit on its own. Although, one may say that the bit
about providing a PlanState-independent ExprContext is more closely
tied with 0004's requirements...

--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-03-31 12:21:47 Re: multithreaded zstd backup compression for client and server
Previous Message Matthias van de Meent 2022-03-31 11:09:06 Re: Commitfest Update