On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2016/06/08 23:16, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
>>>> [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.]
>>>>
>>>> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Robert,
>>>> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
>>>> item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
>>>> 9.6 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on
>>>> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
>>>> message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may
>>>> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
>>>> well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1. Consequently, I will appreciate your
>>>> efforts toward speedy resolution. Thanks.
>>>
>>> Discussion of this issue is still ongoing. Accordingly, I intend to
>>> wait until that discussion has concluded before proceeding further.
>>> I'll check this thread again no later than Friday and send an update
>>> by then.
>>
>> Ashutosh seemed OK with the latest patch.
>
> I adjusted some comments per off-list suggestion from Ashutosh. Please
> find attached the new version.
Are PlaceHolderVars the only problem we need to worry about here?
What about other expressions that creep into the target list during
subquery pull-up which are not safe to push down? See comments in
set_append_rel_size(), recent discussion on the thread "Failed
assertion in parallel worker (ExecInitSubPlan)", and commit
b12fd41c695b43c76b0a9a4d19ba43b05536440c.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
