Re: Speeding up INSERTs and UPDATEs to partitioned tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Speeding up INSERTs and UPDATEs to partitioned tables
Date
Msg-id CAKJS1f_Vt8q2WYSKBwZR0ucuCTXDz0uZh_EUMWQHOqe8EcVyig@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Speeding up INSERTs and UPDATEs to partitioned tables  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Speeding up INSERTs and UPDATEs to partitioned tables  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Re: Speeding up INSERTs and UPDATEs to partitioned tables  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 17 September 2018 at 21:15, David Rowley
<david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> v9 patch attached. Fixes conflict with 6b78231d.

v10 patch attached. Fixes conflict with cc2905e9.

I'm not so sure we need to zero the partition_tuple_slots[] array at
all since we always set a value there is there's a corresponding map
stored. I considered pulling that out, but in the end, I didn't as I
saw some Asserts checking it's been properly set by checking the
element  != NULL in nodeModifyTable.c and copy.c.  Perhaps I should
have just gotten rid of those Asserts along with the palloc0 and
subsequent memset after the expansion of the array. I'm undecided.

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jesper Pedersen
Date:
Subject: Re: partition tree inspection functions
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: automatic restore point