Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYc6bYdPVKui6kp5OXTp9BtfP5+F=n8q+Yh7W9W8FwQsQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables
Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> That seems different than what I suggested and I'm not sure what the >> reason is for the difference? > > The patch adding macros IS_JOIN_REL() and IS_OTHER_REL() and changing > the code to use it will look quite odd by itself. We are not changing > all the instances of RELOPT_JOINREL or RELOPT_OTHER_MEMBER_REL to use > those. There is code which needs to check those kinds, instead of "all > join rels" or "all other rels" resp. So the patch will add those > macros, change only few places to use those macros, which are intended > to be changed while applying partition-wise join support for single > level partitioned table. Hmm. You might be right, but I'm not convinced. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: