Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Date
Msg-id 20180411123554.vlvmx6vzoc3trflq@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Here's an idea.  Why don't we move the function/opclass creation lines
to insert.sql, without the DROPs, and use the same functions/opclasses
in the three tests insert.sql, alter_table.sql, hash_part.sql and
partition_prune.sql, i.e. not recreate what are essentially the same
objects three times?  This also leaves them around for the pg_upgrade
test, which is not a bad thing.

(This would require a few updates to insert.sql because the definitions
there are different, but it shouldn't be a problem coverage-wise.)

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Đặng Minh Hướng
Date:
Subject: Re: User defined data types in Logical Replication
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench doc typos