From: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Alexander Kuzmenkov <akuzmenkov(at)timescale(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Quadratic planning time for ordered paths over partitioned tables |
Date: | 2025-01-24 13:15:19 |
Message-ID: | CAJ7c6TMqgt+vHdjSCeL_1F8JinCyGFg00+5fndHLxxVSAcH6Lw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
> > I think this is closely related to the work Yuya Watari has been doing
> > at
> > https://postgr.es/m/CAJ2pMkZZHrhgQ5UV0y+STKqx7XVGzENMhL98UbKM-OArvK9dmA@mail.gmail.com
> > Perhaps you could contribute by reviewing that patch series.
>
> Yeah, I'm referencing this one in my email, but it's a series of
> patches that does a major refactoring changing thousands of lines. I'm
> not sure when or if it's going to land, do you think applying a quick
> fix first would make sense? It makes trivial changes in one function.
It looks like the author keeps the patch set up to date. Although he
proposes a complicated refactoring this is better than "quick and
dirty fix" as you put it, IMO. So I suggest focusing on this patch
set. On top of that somehow I doubt we will find a committer willing
to be responsible for merging anything quick and dirty anyway.
Did you consider checking if the referenced patchset addresses the
issue you described?
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2025-01-24 13:34:50 | Re: doc: explain pgstatindex fragmentation |
Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2025-01-24 13:00:29 | Re: [PATCH] Add get_bytes() and set_bytes() functions |