Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy
Date
Msg-id 3873394.1708273499@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> We can do the same for BooleanTests. Given a clause such as: "partkey
> IS NOT false", we can just generate the clause "partkey IS true OR
> partkey IS NULL" and recursively generate steps for that.

+1 ... sounds clean and clearly correct.

> I'm tempted to go a bit further in master only and add support for
> bool IS NOT UNKNOWN and bool IS UNKNOWN using the same method.

These are the same as IS NOT NULL and IS NULL, so I don't see the
need for an OR?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #18344: Pruning tables partitioned by bool range fails with invalid strategy