Horton

Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join

Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
Cc: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-04-08T10:18:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Suppress unused-variable warning.

  2. Allow partitionwise joins in more cases.

  3. Avoid crash in partitionwise join planning under GEQO.

  4. Disable support for partitionwise joins in problematic cases.

  5. Add plan_cache_mode setting

  6. Add test for partitionwise join involving default partition.

  7. Revise API for partition_rbound_cmp/partition_rbound_datum_cmp.

On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 15:42, Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Kuntal,
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 4:30 PM Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm getting the following warning during compilation.
> >
> > partbounds.c: In function ‘partition_bounds_merge’:
> > partbounds.c:1024:21: warning: unused variable ‘inner_binfo’
> [-Wunused-variable]
> >   PartitionBoundInfo inner_binfo = inner_rel->boundinfo;
> >                      ^
> > For fixing the same, we can declare inner_binfo as
> > PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY as it is not used for any other purpose.
>
> I'd propose to remove an assertion causing this (and  the
> outer_binfo/inner_binfo variables) from partition_bounds_merge(),
> rather than doing so, because the assertion is redundant, as we have
> the same assertion in merge_list_bounds() and merge_range_bounds().
> Please find attached a patch.
>

Oh, I didn't see this mail before sending my other mail.

I think it's better to have the assertion in all the three places and also
in merge_hash_bounds() whenever that comes along. The assertion in
merge_*_bounds() will be good to in case those functions are called from
places other than partition_bounds_merge(). The assertion in
partition_bounds_merge() will make sure that when the individual
merge_*_bounds() functions are called based on one of the bounds both of
the bounds have same strategy.
-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh