public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jonathan S. Katz <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <[email protected]>
Cc: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Expression errors with "FOR UPDATE" and postgres_fdw with partition wise join enabled.
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 17:06:31 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoaNuWR-Krw9L2NOARNd7gJfHXwgOO8=8J4YAp+P4a1djA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZboTszGQk3OecBOZUFNNjzKE-SOo_Q46xtTJ4Yj95-RQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmobR9XWEhmF3s_WsoLNnnjaFyS_xtbrVG3dCGiUgof20Nw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoZSaKq-fYALn5jf6c_X3==Rb2s8eqLDwGpV=LNNhTXYwg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoYYTCQL=TUYbUz2b=CsQeB4o1L2+_=zHynxGVmyKUtH1A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoazFzdp5ZVwUjk_b2cuB90WCeeWtzt1ShSbXGyg67c+Zw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZMdNiKUGV0=-QLV1f1-Xr0CDT+8y9wLktuEiQGkt64UQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoZjYHtkw-o_4=-GXb6obF1epyivr+WnZ1SQCnU6fgtf+w@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoYhgEkcR1E-BMS-2G8A4_5z0bbN6vCO+uR7HyQCOsWpEw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoaNuWR-Krw9L2NOARNd7gJfHXwgOO8=8J4YAp+P4a1djA@mail.gmail.com>
> On Aug 14, 2018, at 11:51 AM, Robert Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:32 PM, Etsuro Fujita
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> One thing I noticed might be an improvement is to skip
>> build_joinrel_partition_info if the given joinrel will be to have
>> consider_partitionwise_join=false; in the previous patch, that function
>> created the joinrel's partition info such as part_scheme and part_rels if
>> the joinrel is considered as partitioned, independently of the flag
>> consider_partitionwise_join for it, but if that flag is false, we don't
>> generate PWJ paths for the joinrel, so we would not need to create that
>> partition info at all. This would not only avoid unnecessary processing in
>> that function, but also make unnecessary the changes I made to
>> try_partitionwise_join, generate_partitionwise_join_paths,
>> apply_scanjoin_target_to_paths, and create_ordinary_grouping_paths. So I
>> updated the patch that way. Please find attached an updated version of the
>> patch.
>
> I guess the question is whether there are (or might be in the future)
> other dependencies on part_scheme. For example, it looks like
> partition pruning uses it. I'm not sure whether partition pruning
> supports a plan like:
>
> Append
> -> Nested Loop
> -> Seq Scan on p1
> -> Index Scan on q1
> <repeat the above for p2/q2 etc.>
>
> If it doesn't, that's just an implementation restriction; somebody
> might want to fix things so it works, if it doesn't already.
While we (the RMT) are happy to see there has been progress on this thread,
11 Beta 3 was released containing this problem and the time to adequately
test this feature prior to GA release is rapidly dwindling.
The RMT would like to see this prioritized and resolved. At this point we have
considered the option of having partitionwise joins completely disabled in
PostgreSQL 11. This is preferably not the path we want to choose, but this
option is now on the table and we will issue an ultimatum soon if we do not see
further progress.
In the previous discussion, the generally accepted solution for PostgreSQL 11
seemed to be to disable the problematic case and any further work would be for
PostgreSQL 12 only. If something is different, please indicate why ASAP and
work to resolve. The RMT will also conduct some additional technical analysis
as well.
Sincerely,
Alvaro, Andres, Jonathan
Attachments:
[application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (833B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
download
view thread (115+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Expression errors with "FOR UPDATE" and postgres_fdw with partition wise join enabled.
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox