Reply-To: jesper.pedersen@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
To: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>,
 Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
 Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
 Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>,
 Beena Emerson <memissemerson@gmail.com>, Robert Haas
 <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>,
 "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
 Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@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>
From: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
Message-ID: <308e5f60-cf13-bf1e-73bc-4e40f5128baf@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 09:55:19 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKJS1f_yFC8vVLd3mHP4pxhRgPRKb9hqa4Zv+5v5pko6f038dA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

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.gmail.com

Best regards,
  Jesper