| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Oddity in tuple routing for foreign partitions |
| Date: | 2018-04-24 16:21:40 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaHAnbUD3pKiU54ktUAGBnRE3Q7==os9y_WkPU409ac3g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 11:25 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> Robert, I think this is your turf, per 3d956d9562aa. Are you looking
> into it?
Thanks for the ping. I just had a look over the proposed patch and I
guess I don't like it very much. Temporarily modifying the range
table in place and then changing it back before we return seems ugly
and error-prone. I hope we can come up with a solution that doesn't
involve needing to do that.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-04-24 17:00:00 | Re: Built-in connection pooling |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-04-24 16:17:10 | Re: Transform for pl/perl |