From: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>
To: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Beena Emerson <memissemerson@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 09:55:19 -0400
Message-ID: <308e5f60-cf13-bf1e-73bc-4e40f5128baf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKJS1f_yFC8vVLd3mHP4pxhRgPRKb9hqa4Zv+5v5pko6f038dA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180406212507.6ddl76zkhd2ze4p5@alvherre.pgsql>
<20180406212917.zzq5dbmasyt3fwru@alvherre.pgsql>
<CAKJS1f88oG+RPaFCxFf4=omk8KfVZCrWuBHXazag4zGBinagBA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKJS1f99JnkbOshdV_4zoJZ96DPtKeHMHv43JRL_ZdHRkkVKCA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKJS1f-42TXEo1DLZ_FXBNiRuJ3=Oy-Z5V8_0WkL0_Ast=9saw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+HiwqHAKp4=jSQH3WWL4+s3=qWrCaCnBCu-zx4eZ_Tqn6g4DQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKJS1f_yFC8vVLd3mHP4pxhRgPRKb9hqa4Zv+5v5pko6f038dA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On 04/07/2018 04:45 AM, David Rowley wrote:
> Ok, so I've gone and done this.
>
> PartitionPruning has become PartitionPruneState
> PartitionRelPruning has become PartitionPruningData
>
> I've changed pointers to PartitionPruneStates to be named prunestate,
> sometimes having the node prefix; as_, ma_, in these cases prune and
> state are separated with a _ which seems to be the general rule for
> executor state struct members.
>
> Generally, pointers to PartitionPruningData are now named pprune.
> Hopefully, that's ok, as this was the name previously used for
> PartitionPruning pointers.
>
> I applied the patch to get rid of as_noop_scan in favour of using a
> special as_whichplan value. There was already one special value
> (INVALID_SUBPLAN_INDEX), so seemed better to build on that rather than
> inventing something new. This also means we don't have to make the
> AppendState struct and wider too, which seems like a good thing to try
> to do.
>
> I made all the fixups which I mentioned in my review earlier and also
> re-removed the resultRelation parameter from make_partition_pruneinfo.
> It sneaked back into v22.
>
> v23 is attached.
>
Passes check-world.
Changing explain.c to "Subplans Removed" as suggested by you in [1] is a
good idea.
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKJS1f99JnkbOshdV_4zoJZ96DPtKeHMHv43JRL_ZdHRkkVKCA%40mail.gma...
Best regards,
Jesper
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: jesper.pedersen@redhat.com, david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com, amitlangote09@gmail.com, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp, rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com, memissemerson@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, sulamul@gmail.com, dilipbalaut@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
In-Reply-To: <308e5f60-cf13-bf1e-73bc-4e40f5128baf@redhat.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox