| From: | Thomas <thomasmannhart97(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, boehlen(at)ifi(dot)uzh(dot)ch, dignoes(at)inf(dot)unibz(dot)it, gamper(at)inf(dot)unibz(dot)it, P(dot)Moser(at)noi(dot)bz(dot)it |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Range Merge Join |
| Date: | 2021-06-10 09:04:08 |
| Message-ID: | CAMWfgiB2zdoXfKuA+UNgX_ZqFJRDAczMFqeRdYD4nmu4-KSL0A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thank you for the feedback.
I removed the redundant comments from the patch and added this thread to
the July CF [1].
Best Regards,
Thomas Mannhart
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/33/3160/
Am Do., 10. Juni 2021 um 05:10 Uhr schrieb David Rowley <
dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 03:05, Thomas <thomasmannhart97(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > We have implemented the Range Merge Join algorithm by extending the
> > existing Merge Join to also support range conditions, i.e., BETWEEN-AND
> > or @> (containment for range types).
>
> It shouldn't be a blocker for you, but just so you're aware, there was
> a previous proposal for this in [1] and a patch in [2]. I've include
> Jeff here just so he's aware of this. Jeff may wish to state his
> intentions with his own patch. It's been a few years now.
>
> I only just glanced over the patch. I'd suggest getting rid of the /*
> Thomas */ comments. We use git, so if you need an audit trail about
> changes then you'll find it in git blame. If you have those for an
> internal audit trail then you should consider using git. No committer
> would commit those to PostgreSQL, so they might as well disappear.
>
> For further review, please add the patch to the July commitfest [3].
> We should be branching for pg15 sometime before the start of July.
> There will be more focus on new patches around that time. Further
> details in [4].
>
> Also, I see this if your first post to this list, so welcome, and
> thank you for the contribution. Also, just to set expectations;
> patches like this almost always take a while to get into shape for
> PostgreSQL. Please expect a lot of requests to change things. That's
> fairly standard procedure. The process often drags on for months and
> in some less common cases, years.
>
> David
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/6227.1334559170%40sss.pgh.pa.us#82c771950ba486dec911923a5e910000
> [2]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAMp0ubfwAFFW3O_NgKqpRPmm56M4weTEXjprb2gP_NrDaEC4Eg%40mail.gmail.com
> [3] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/33/
> [4] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CommitFest
>
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| postgres-rmj.patch | application/octet-stream | 46.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nitin Jadhav | 2021-06-10 09:49:20 | Re: when the startup process doesn't |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2021-06-10 08:58:41 | Re: "an SQL" vs. "a SQL" |