Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key
От | Amit Khandekar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJ3gD9crKU4JFYgs3zOnz1V=Ve2i_w_Koq5WYJp=y0PFZ4w-2A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key (Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 15 January 2018 at 16:11, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com> wrote: > I went ahead and did the above changes. I haven't yet merged these > changes in the main patch. Instead, I have attached it as an > incremental patch to be applied on the main v36 patch. The incremental > patch is not yet quite polished, and quite a bit of cosmetic changes > might be required, plus testing. But am posting it in case I have some > early feedback. I have now embedded the above incremental patch changes into the main patch (v37) , which is attached. Because it is used heavily in case of transition tables with partitions, I have made TupConvMapForLeaf() a macro. And the actual creation of the map is in separate function CreateTupConvMapForLeaf(), so as to reduce the macro size. Retained child_parent_map_not_required as a bool array, as against a bitmap. To include one scenario related to on-demand map allocation that was not getting covered with the update.sql test, I added one more scenario in that file : +-- Case where per-partition tuple conversion map array is allocated, but the +-- map is not required for the particular tuple that is routed, thanks to +-- matching table attributes of the partition and the target table. -- Thanks, -Amit Khandekar EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: