Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20180410213203.nl645o5vj5ap66sl@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > >> I don't get this. The executor surely had to (and did) open all of > >> the relations somewhere even before this patch. > > I was worried that this coding could be seen as breaking modularity, or > > trying to do excessive work. However, after looking closer at it, it > > doesn't really look like it's the case. So, nevermind. > > Well what I'm saying is that it shouldn't be necessary. If the > relations are being opened already and the pointers to the relcache > entries are being saved someplace, you shouldn't need to re-open them > elsewhere to get pointers to the relcache entries. I looked a bit more into this. It turns out that we have indeed opened the relation before -- first in parserOpenTable (for addRangeTableEntry), then in expandRTE, then in QueryRewrite, then in subquery_planner, then in get_relation_info. So, frankly, since each module thinks it's okay to open it every once in a while, I'm not sure we should be terribly stressed about doing it once more for partition pruning. Particularly since communicating the pointer seems to be quite troublesome. To figure out, I used the attached patch (not intended for application) to add a backtrace to each log message, plus a couple of accusatory elog() calls in relation_open and ExecSetupPartitionPruneState. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: