Re: Getting sorted data from foreign server for merge join
От | Ashutosh Bapat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Getting sorted data from foreign server for merge join |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFjFpRdOO+nqMMnTBR-dYD1Or2WiVEdpkbPtH=8-EQzyfe1hkA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Getting sorted data from foreign server for merge join (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
<div dir="ltr">Thanks.<br /></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 12:24 AM,Robert Haas <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:robertmhaas@gmail.com" target="_blank">robertmhaas@gmail.com</a>></span>wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Ashutosh Bapat<br /> <<ahref="mailto:ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com">ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com</a>> wrote:<br /> >> I wentover this patch in some detail today and did a lot of cosmetic<br /> >> cleanup. The results are attached. I'mfairly happy with this<br /> >> version, but let me know what you think. Of course, feedback from<br /> >>others is more than welcome also.<br /> >><br /> ><br /> > Attached patch with some cosmetic changes(listed here for your quick<br /> > reference)<br /> > 1. , was replaced with ; in comment "inner join, expressionsin the " at one<br /> > place, which is correct, but missed other place.<br /> > 2. The comment "First,consider whether any each active EC is potentially"<br /> > should use either "any" or "each". I have rewordedit as "First, consider<br /> > whether any of the active ECs is potentially ...". Or we can use "First,<br />> find all of the active ECs which are potentially ....".<br /> > 3. "having the remote side due the sort generallywon't be any worse ..." -<br /> > instead of "due" we should use "do"?<br /> > 4. Added static prototype offunction get_useful_ecs_for_relation().<br /> > 5. The comment "Extract unique EC for query, if any, so we don't considerit<br /> > again." is too crisp. Phrase "Unique EC for query" is confusing; EC can not<br /> > be associatedwith a query per say and EC's are always unique because of<br /> > canonicalisation. May be we should rewordit as "Extract single EC for<br /> > ordering of query, if any, so we don't consider it again." Is that cryptic<br/> > as well?<br /><br /></span>Thanks. I committed this version with one small tweak.<br /><div class="HOEnZb"><divclass="h5"><br /> --<br /> Robert Haas<br /> EnterpriseDB: <a href="http://www.enterprisedb.com" rel="noreferrer"target="_blank">http://www.enterprisedb.com</a><br /> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company<br /></div></div></blockquote></div><br/><br clear="all" /><br />-- <br /><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Best Wishes,<br/>Ashutosh Bapat<br />EnterpriseDB Corporation<br />The Postgres Database Company<br /></div></div></div>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: