Horton

Re: reorganizing partitioning code

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-03-28T21:09:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:07 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2018/03/22 11:45, Amit Langote wrote:
>> FWIW, I did manage to rebase it this morning and posting it here.
>
> Rebased again.
>
> I started wondering if we should separate out stuff related to partition
> bounds.  That is create a utils/partbound.h and put PartitionBoundInfo and
> related comparison and search functions into a utils/adt/partbound.c.  I
> had started thinking about that when I looked at the code added by the
> patch submitted on the "advanced partition matching algorithm for
> partition-wise join" thread [1].  I haven't done anything about that though.

adt = Abstract Data Type, which I think we've interpreted up until now
to mean an SQL-visible data type, so that seems like an odd choice.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Reorganize partitioning code