Re: minor fix for acquire_inherited_sample_rows

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 9:54 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> +1. I think we're really abusing equalTupleDescs() for purposes for
>> which it was not invented. Instead of changing it, let's invent a new
>> function that tests for the thing partitioning cares about (same
>> ordering of the same columns with the same type information) and call
>> it logicallyEqualTupleDescs() or something like that.
>
> Why don't we just rely on the output of convert_tuples_by_name(),
> which it seems is always called right now? What's advantage of adding
> another tuple descriptor comparison?

The patch I mentioned in my email above does more or less that (what
you're saying we should do). In fact it even modifies
convert_tuple_by_name and convert_tuple_by_name_map to remove some
redundant computation. See that patch here if you're interested:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/825031be-942c-8c24-6163-13c27f217a3d%40lab.ntt.co.jp

Thanks,
Amit