Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key
От | Etsuro Fujita |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e2a12f49-9abc-c9b2-14b3-41c19af4be01@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] UPDATE of partition key
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017/07/03 18:54, Amit Langote wrote: > On 2017/07/02 20:10, Robert Haas wrote: >> But that seems like it wouldn't be too hard to fix: let's have >> expand_inherited_rtentry() expand the partitioned table in the same >> order that will be used by ExecSetupPartitionTupleRouting(). That's really what I wanted when updating the patch for tuple-routing to foreign partitions. (I don't understand the issue discussed here, though.) >> That >> seems pretty easy to do - just have expand_inherited_rtentry() notice >> that it's got a partitioned table and call >> RelationGetPartitionDispatchInfo() instead of find_all_inheritors() to >> produce the list of OIDs. Seems like a good idea. > Interesting idea. > > If we are going to do this, I think we may need to modify > RelationGetPartitionDispatchInfo() a bit or invent an alternative that > does not do as much work. Currently, it assumes that it's only ever > called by ExecSetupPartitionTupleRouting() and hence also generates > PartitionDispatchInfo objects for partitioned child tables. We don't need > that if called from within the planner. > > Actually, it seems that RelationGetPartitionDispatchInfo() is too coupled > with its usage within the executor, because there is this comment: > > /* > * We keep the partitioned ones open until we're done using the > * information being collected here (for example, see > * ExecEndModifyTable). > */ Yeah, we need some refactoring work. Is anyone working on that? Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: