From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | 1105066510(at)qq(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18568: BUG: Result wrong when do group by on partition table! |
Date: | 2024-10-22 09:25:41 |
Message-ID: | CA+HiwqFN7ydxu3vCrGqbF0rM0bruk59er9mSCbTFJufG1h2-Lg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 5:30 PM Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> 于2024年10月22日周二 15:33写道:
>> Not really. As the documentation says, collation can be specified per
>> column or per operation:
>>
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/collation.html
>>
>> In this case, the operation is partitioning. When you specify the
>> COLLATE clause for a partition key, it means that the partitioning
>> logic, such as partition tuple routing, will use that collation
>> instead of the column-specified or the column type's collation.
>
>
> Since you said partition key had its own collation, and but we used column type's collation in
> set_baserel_partition_key_exprs() as below:
>
> partexpr = (Expr *) makeVar(varno, attno,
> partkey->parttypid[cnt],
> partkey->parttypmod[cnt],
> partkey->parttypcoll[cnt], 0);
>
> I think why not we directly use the partition key collation(e.g. partcollation).
That's a good question but I don't immediately know the answer.
It seems like it has been like this since the beginning or since the
commit that added the RelOptInfo.partexprs field (9140cf8269).
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tender Wang | 2024-10-22 11:14:34 | Re: BUG #18568: BUG: Result wrong when do group by on partition table! |
Previous Message | Tender Wang | 2024-10-22 08:30:04 | Re: BUG #18568: BUG: Result wrong when do group by on partition table! |