Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ashutosh Bapat
Subject Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join
Date
Msg-id CAFjFpRe72byqheTWkfryG37_VouwYwDFT6vmcNBhfD0+_yFLqw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi Ashutosh,
>
> On 2018/05/14 20:14, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> 0001-Hash-partition-bound-equality-refactoring.patch
>> 0002-Targetlist-of-a-child-join-is-produced-by-translatin.patch
>> 0003-Partition-wise-join-for-1-1-1-0-0-1-partition-matchi.patch
>> 0004-Add-a-debug-message-to-notify-whether-partition-wise.patch
>> 0005-Tests-for-0-1-1-1-and-1-0-partition-matching.patch
>> 0006-Extra-extensive-tests-for-advanced-partition-matchin.patch
>
> I noticed after *cleanly* applying 0001-0004 to today's HEAD that while
> 0005's test all pass, there are many failures in 0006's tests.  Maybe, you
> need to adjust something in one of the patches or adjust test outputs.

If the failures are because of plan changes, it's expected. If those
are because of crashes or changed output, those need to be fixed. I
have kept that patch to notice any crashes or output changes, in which
case, I pull that test into 0005 test set after fixing the code. Once
we are near commit, I will remove that patch from the patchset.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: Protect syscache from bloating with negative cache entries
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: ssl_library parameter