Re: Patch for removng unused targets - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: Patch for removng unused targets
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfdutiWa6u1YapZay8hUR=CD4WTqNt-5qzBK2yFPrr-nfSw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch for removng unused targets  ("Etsuro Fujita" <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: Patch for removng unused targets  ("Etsuro Fujita" <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Etsuro!

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
Hi Alexander,

I wrote:
> > > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
>
> > > resjunk means that the target is not supposed to be output by the query.
> > > Since it's there at all, it's presumably referenced by ORDER BY or GROUP
> > > BY or DISTINCT ON, but the meaning of the flag doesn't depend on that.
>
> > > What you would need to do is verify that the target is resjunk and not
> > > used in any clause besides ORDER BY.  I have not read your patch, but
> > > I rather imagine that what you've got now is that the parser checks this
> > > and sets the new flag for consumption far downstream.  Why not just make
> > > the same check in the planner?
>
> > I've created a patch using this approach.
>
> I've rebased the above patch against the latest head.  Could you review the
> patch?  If you have no objection, I'd like to mark the patch "ready for
> committer".

Sorry, I've had a cleanup of the patch.  Please find attached the patch.

I've checked the attached patch. It looks good for me. No objection to mark it "ready for committer".

------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: dump difference between 9.3 and master after upgrade
Next
From: Svenne Krap
Date:
Subject: Git-master regression failure