Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com
Subject: Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans
Date: 2020-07-01 06:30:39
Message-ID: CA+HiwqG3bw0ZynQDinUJ76q9LPrGGRNHKnX32Y7VWcFRA9FZpA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:36 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I would like to discuss a refactoring patch that builds on top of the
> patches at [1] to address $subject.

I forgot to update a place in postgres_fdw causing one of its tests to crash.

Fixed in the attached updated version.

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

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0003-Delay-initializing-UPDATE-DELETE-ResultRelInfos.patch application/octet-stream 67.2 KB
v2-0002-Do-not-set-rootResultRelIndex-unnecessarily.patch application/octet-stream 1.3 KB
v2-0001-Revise-how-some-FDW-executor-APIs-obtain-ResultRe.patch application/octet-stream 10.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2020-07-01 06:46:02 Re: HashAgg's batching counter starts at 0, but Hash's starts at 1.
Previous Message torikoshia 2020-07-01 05:48:02 Re: Creating a function for exposing memory usage of backend process