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+TgmoZt=JpVvCepS5pxu2M-SOwh_50AXDyUvEDDxqyG58FX1A@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>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Right. If we could use parent Vars to indicate parent Var or child Var > depending upon the context, a lot of memory issues would be solved; we > wouldn't need to translate a single expression. But I think that's not > straight forward. I have been thinking about some kind of polymorphic > Var node, but it seems a lot more invasive change. Although, if we > could get something like that, we would save a huge memory. :) Yes, that's why I'm interested in exploring that approach once the basic framework is in place here. > I am wondering whether we need to change > calc_non_nestloop_required_outer() similar to > calc_nestloop_required_outer() just to keep their signatures in sync. I haven't looked at the patch, but I don't think you need to worry about that. > Should I work on completing reparamterized_path_by_child() to support > all kinds of paths? Yes, or at the very least all scans, like reparameterize_path() already does. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: