Re: pruning disabled for array, enum, record, range type partition keys

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-04-17T22:11:18Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

Amit Langote wrote:

> Ah, I think I got it after staring at the (btree) index code for a bit.
> 
> What pruning code got wrong is that it's comparing the expression type
> (type of the constant arg that will be compared with partition bound
> datums when pruning) with the partopcintype to determine if we should look
> up the cross-type comparison/hashing procedure, whereas what the latter
> should be compare with is the clause operator's oprighttype.  ISTM, if
> op_in_opfamily() passed for the operator, that's the correct thing to do.

I wonder why you left out the hash partitioning case?  I don't really
know that this is correct, but here's a delta patch as demonstration.

(v3 is your patch, I think the only change is I renamed the tables used
in the test)

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Rework code to determine partition pruning procedure