Re: [HACKERS] Proposal : Parallel Merge Join - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dilip Kumar
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Proposal : Parallel Merge Join
Date
Msg-id CAFiTN-syQ45cjLDPzW=D9LcYmzVZTKnReJ67VxYLfo=k+-m8pQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Proposal : Parallel Merge Join  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Proposal : Parallel Merge Join  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Proposal : Parallel Merge Join  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This patch is hard to read because it is reorganizing a bunch of code
>> as well as adding new functionality.  Perhaps you could separate it
>> into two patches, one with the refactoring and then the other with the
>> new functionality.
>
> Okay, I can do that.

I have created two patches as per the suggestion.

1. mergejoin_refactoring_v2.patch --> Move functionality of
considering various merge join path into new function.
2. parallel_mergejoin_v2.patch -> This adds the functionality of
supporting partial mergejoin paths. This will apply on top of
mergejoin_refactoring_v2.patch.

-- 
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Fixing matching of boolean index columns to sort ordering