Re: minor fix for acquire_inherited_sample_rows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: minor fix for acquire_inherited_sample_rows
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqGwHySdgZxTyyPHO5CtTa-E63jsciDEDZe2aWVNLVCrgg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: minor fix for acquire_inherited_sample_rows  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: minor fix for acquire_inherited_sample_rows  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: minor fix for acquire_inherited_sample_rows  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 9:54 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1.  I think we're really abusing equalTupleDescs() for purposes for
>> which it was not invented.  Instead of changing it, let's invent a new
>> function that tests for the thing partitioning cares about (same
>> ordering of the same columns with the same type information) and call
>> it logicallyEqualTupleDescs() or something like that.
>
> Why don't we just rely on the output of convert_tuples_by_name(),
> which it seems is always called right now? What's advantage of adding
> another tuple descriptor comparison?

The patch I mentioned in my email above does more or less that (what
you're saying we should do).  In fact it even modifies
convert_tuple_by_name and convert_tuple_by_name_map to remove some
redundant computation.  See that patch here if you're interested:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/825031be-942c-8c24-6163-13c27f217a3d%40lab.ntt.co.jp

Thanks,
Amit


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: jitflags in _outPlannedStmt and _readPlannedStmt treated as bool type
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: unused_oids script is broken with bsd sed