Re: Patch for removng unused targets
От | Hitoshi Harada |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch for removng unused targets |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAP7QgmmyBq04dUwZvvuZ6RHtbnfy25GczM5c83N80bhp5enG4A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch for removng unused targets ("Etsuro Fujita" <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch for removng unused targets
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
-- > I guess the patch works fine, but what I'm saying is it might be limited toYeah, I thought the extension to the window ORDER BY case, too. But I'm not
> small use cases. Another instance of this that I can think of is ORDER BY
clause
> of window specifications, which you may want to remove from the target list
> as well, in addition to ORDER BY of query. It will just not be removed by
this
> approach, simply because it is looking at only parse->sortClause. Certainly
> you can add more rules to the new function to look at the window
specification,
> but then I'm not sure what we are missing.
sure it's worth complicating the code, considering that the objective of this
optimization is to improve full-text search related things if I understand
correctly, though general solutions would be desirable as you mentioned.
Ah, I see the use case now. Makes sense.
> So, as it stands it doesn't haveOK. I'll also wait for others' comments. For review, an updated version of the
> critical issue, but more generalized approach would be desirable. That said,
> I don't have strong objection to the current patch, and just posting one
thought
> to see if others may have the same opinion.
patch is attached, which fixed the bug using the approach that directly uses the
clause information in the parse tree.
I tried several ways but I couldn't find big problems. Small typo: s/rejunk/resjunk/
I defer to commiter.
Thanks,
Hitoshi Harada
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: