Amit-san
On Wednesday, July 8, 2020 11:53 AM, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>:
> I think the only reason that this is not supported is that I hadn't tested such a
> query when developing partition pruning, nor did anyone else suggest doing
> so. :)
Thanks for the information. I'm relieved to hear this reason.
Regards,
Sho kato
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 11:53 AM
> To: Kato, Sho/加藤 翔 <kato-sho@fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>; PostgreSQL-development
> <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
> Subject: Re: Performing partition pruning using row value
>
> Kato-san,
>
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 10:32 AM kato-sho@fujitsu.com
> <kato-sho@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 6:31 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Just to be clear, the condition (c1, c2) < (99, 99) is not
> > > equivalent to the condition c1 < 99 and c2 < 99 (see the documentation
> note in [1]).
> >
> > Thanks for sharing this document. I have understood.
> >
> > > but I don't think the main reason for that is that it takes time to
> > > parse expressions.
>
> I think the only reason that this is not supported is that I hadn't tested such a
> query when developing partition pruning, nor did anyone else suggest doing
> so. :)
>
> > > Yeah, I think it's great to support row-wise comparison not only
> > > with the small number of args but with the large number of them.
>
> +1
>
> > These comments are very helpful.
> > Ok, I try to make POC that allows row-wise comparison with
> partition-pruning.
>
> That would be great, thank you.
>
> --
> Amit Langote
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
