| From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Luc Vlaming <luc(at)swarm64(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: "could not find pathkey item to sort" for TPC-DS queries 94-96 |
| Date: | 2021-04-19 20:49:05 |
| Message-ID: | CAAaqYe8q55PXHkQZHkZEYy7b6_B72MntWGXN6xcTo8T716zOZw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 3:39 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> ...
> Also, I don't much care for either the name or API of
> find_em_expr_usable_for_sorting_rel. The sole current caller only
> really needs a boolean result, and if it did need more than that
> it'd likely need the whole EquivalenceMember not just the em_expr
> (certainly createplan.c does). So 0002 attached is some bikeshedding
> on that. I kept that separate because it might be wise to do it only
> in HEAD, just in case somebody out there is calling the function from
> an extension.
I forgot to comment on this in my previous email, but it seems to me
that relation_has_safe_ec_member, while less wordy, isn't quite
descriptive enough. Perhaps something like
relation_has_sort_safe_ec_member?
James Coleman
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-04-19 21:08:51 | Re: Allowing to create LEAKPROOF functions to non-superuser |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-04-19 20:47:38 | Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance |