Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYc6bYdPVKui6kp5OXTp9BtfP5+F=n8q+Yh7W9W8FwQsQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables  (Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> That seems different than what I suggested and I'm not sure what the
>> reason is for the difference?
>
> The patch adding macros IS_JOIN_REL() and IS_OTHER_REL() and changing
> the code to use it will look quite odd by itself. We are not changing
> all the instances of RELOPT_JOINREL or RELOPT_OTHER_MEMBER_REL to use
> those. There is code which needs to check those kinds, instead of "all
> join rels" or "all other rels" resp. So the patch will add those
> macros, change only few places to use those macros, which are intended
> to be changed while applying partition-wise join support for single
> level partitioned table.

Hmm.  You might be right, but I'm not convinced.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables
Next
From: Beena Emerson
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size