Re: non-bulk inserts and tuple routing

Fujita-san,

Thanks for the review.

On 2018/02/09 21:20, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>>> * Please add a brief decsription about partition_oids to the comments for
>>> this struct.
>>>
>>> @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ typedef struct PartitionTupleRouting
>>>   {
>>>      PartitionDispatch *partition_dispatch_info;
>>>      int         num_dispatch;
>>> +   Oid        *partition_oids;
>>
>> Done.
> 
> Thanks, but one thing I'm wondering is: do we really need this array?  I
> think we could store into PartitionTupleRouting the list of oids returned
> by RelationGetPartitionDispatchInfo in ExecSetupPartitionTupleRouting,
> instead.  Sorry, I should have commented this in a previous email, but
> what do you think about that?

ExecInitPartitionInfo() will have to iterate the list to get the OID of
the partition to be initialized.  Isn't it much cheaper with the array?

> Here are other comments:
> 
> o On changes to ExecSetupPartitionTupleRouting:
> 
> * This is nitpicking, but it would be better to define partrel and
> part_tupdesc within the if (update_rri_index < num_update_rri &&
> RelationGetRelid(update_rri[update_rri_index].ri_RelationDesc) ==
> leaf_oid) block.
> 
> -               ResultRelInfo *leaf_part_rri;
> +               ResultRelInfo *leaf_part_rri = NULL;
>                 Relation        partrel = NULL;
>                 TupleDesc       part_tupdesc;
>                 Oid                     leaf_oid = lfirst_oid(cell);

Sure, done.

> * Do we need this?  For a leaf partition that is already present in the
> subplan resultrels, the partition's indices (if any) would have already
> been opened.
> 
> +                               /*
> +                                * Open partition indices.  We wouldn't
> need speculative
> +                                * insertions though.
> +                                */
> +                               if
> (leaf_part_rri->ri_RelationDesc->rd_rel->relhasindex &&
> + leaf_part_rri->ri_IndexRelationDescs == NULL)
> +                                       ExecOpenIndices(leaf_part_rri,
> false);

You're right.  Removed the call.

Updated patch is attached.

Thanks,
Amit