Horton

Re: [POC] hash partitioning

Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
To: amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: Jesper Pedersen <jesper.pedersen@redhat.com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-10-10T10:13:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 3:40 PM, amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> natts represents the number of attributes, but for the hash partition bound we
>> are not dealing with the attribute so that I have used short-form of dimension,
>> thoughts?
>
> Okay, I think the dimension(dim) is also unfit here.  Any suggestions?
>


I think natts is ok, since we are dealing with the number of
attributes in the pack of datums; esp. when ndatums is already taken.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

Commits

  1. Add hash partitioning.

  2. Add sanity check for pg_proc.provariadic

  3. Add hash_combine64.

  4. Make RelationGetPartitionDispatchInfo expand depth-first.

  5. Introduce 64-bit hash functions with a 64-bit seed.

  6. pg_dump: Add a --load-via-partition-root option.