Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions
От | Amit Langote |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+HiwqGz_CYVpSv47VbFOxpzPKW63MRajRcwH-a9Qv_EEog8JA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 4:41 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Alvaro, > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 5:32 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 6:27 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > > Thanks, I've merged all. I do wonder that it is only in PlannedStmt > > > that the list is called something that is not "rtepermlist", but I'm > > > fine with it if you prefer that. > > > > I was unsure about that one myself; I just changed it because that > > struct uses camelCaseNaming, which the others do not, so it seemed fine > > in the other places but not there. As for changing "list" to "infos", > > it seems to me we tend to avoid naming a list as "list", so. (Maybe I > > would change the others to be foo_rteperminfos. Unless these naming > > choices were already bikeshedded to its present form upthread and I > > missed it?) > > No, I think it was I who came up with the "..list" naming and > basically just stuck with it. > > Actually, I don't mind changing to "...infos", which I have done in > the attached updated patch. > > > > As I mentioned above, I've broken a couple of other changes out into > > > their own patches that I've put before the main patch. 0001 adds > > > ExecGetRootToChildMap(). I thought it would be better to write in the > > > commit message why the new map is necessary for the main patch. > > > > I was thinking about this one and it seemed too closely tied to > > ExecGetInsertedCols to be committed separately. Notice how there is a > > comment that mentions that function in your 0001, but that function > > itself still uses ri_RootToPartitionMap, so before your 0003 the comment > > is bogus. And there's now quite some duplicity between > > ri_RootToPartitionMap and ri_RootToChildMap, which I think it would be > > better to reduce. I mean, rather than add a new field it would be > > better to repurpose the old one: > > > > - ExecGetRootToChildMap should return TupleConversionMap * > > - every place that accesses ri_RootToPartitionMap directly should be > > using ExecGetRootToChildMap() instead > > - ExecGetRootToChildMap passes build_attrmap_by_name_if_req > > !resultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc->rd_rel->relispartition > > as third argument to build_attrmap_by_name_if_req (rather than > > constant true), so that we keep the tuple compatibility checking we > > have there currently. > > This sounds like a better idea than adding a new AttrMap, so done this > way in the attached 0001. > > > > 0002 contains changes that has to do with changing how we access > > > checkAsUser in some foreign table planning/execution code sites. > > > Thought it might be better to describe it separately too. > > > > I'll get this one pushed soon, it seems good to me. (I'll edit to not > > use Oid as boolean.) > > Thanks for committing that one. > > I've also merged into 0002 the delta patch I had posted earlier to add > a copy of RTEPermInfos into the flattened permInfos list instead of > adding the Query's copy. Oops, hit send before attaching anything. -- Thanks, Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: