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

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZrHwE+McQtCG+EQdbHPt+a3np=-18Bf2KM=tQUbYDJ2g@mail.gmail.com
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
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 4:50 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Rebased patches attached.  Because Dilip complained earlier today about
> clauses of the form (const op var) not causing partition-pruning, I've
> added code to commute the clause where it is required.  Some other
> previously mentioned limitations remain -- no handling of OR clauses, no
> elimination of redundant clauses for given partitioning column, etc.
>
> A note about 0001: this patch overlaps with
> 0003-Canonical-partition-scheme.patch from the partitionwise-join patch
> series that Ashutosh Bapat posted yesterday [1].

It doesn't merely overlap; it's obviously a derivative work, and the
commit message in your version should credit all the authors.

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


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch: add --if-exists to pg_recvlogical
Next
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] COMMIT TRIGGERs, take n, implemented with CONSTRAINTTRIGGERS