Re: [HACKERS] fix possible optimizations in ATExecAttachPartition() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeevan Ladhe
Subject Re: [HACKERS] fix possible optimizations in ATExecAttachPartition()
Date
Msg-id CAOgcT0MQ48ixyTdsGOf_kApyqnewBG9p10bAAag7sQQPfCuAJg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] fix possible optimizations in ATExecAttachPartition()  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:12 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Yeah, I was thinking the same while writing the patch posted on the thread
> "A bug in mapping attributes in ATExecAttachPartition()" [1].  That patch
> adds the break you mention in 2, but didn't do anything about point 1.
>
> In any case, +1 to your patch.  I'll rebase if someone decides to commit
> it first.

If the patch I posted in
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoYmW9VwCWDpe7eXUxeKmAKOxmg8itgFkB5UTQTq4SnTjQ%40mail.gmail.com
gets committed, all of this code will be gone entirely, so this will
be moot.  If we decide to repair the existing broken logic rather than
ripping it out entirely then this is probably a good idea, but I hope
that's not what happens.

That seems a better option to me too.
+1

Regards,
Jeevan Ladhe 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Piotr Stefaniak
Date:
Subject: Re: pgindent (was Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Preventivemaintenance in advance of pgindent run.)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgindent (was Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Preventive maintenance in advance of pgindent run.)