| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Kato, Sho" <kato-sho(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Run-time pruning for ModifyTable |
| Date: | 2020-03-25 00:48:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvriM918qSynhCEkb8a-FZXiubWcmmKhJZDYSrzs9wYueQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 13:00, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I had a closer look at this today and the code I have in
> > inheritance_planner() is certainly not right.
>
> Although I didn't get around to it for v13, there's still a plan on the
> table for inheritance_planner() to get nuked from orbit [1].
>
> Maybe this improvement should be put on hold till that's done?
Possibly. I'm not really wedded to the idea of getting it in. However,
it would really only be the inheritance planner part that would need
to be changed later. I don't think any of the other code would need to
be adjusted.
Amit shared his thoughts in [1]. If you'd rather I held off, then I will.
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | James Coleman | 2020-03-25 00:58:31 | Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2020-03-25 00:44:39 | Re: Include sequence relation support in logical replication |