Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join
Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
From: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
To: amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>,
Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>,
Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-09-05T07:10:44Z
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 →
-
Suppress unused-variable warning.
- 401418ca6a68 13.0 landed
-
Allow partitionwise joins in more cases.
- c8434d64ce03 13.0 landed
-
Avoid crash in partitionwise join planning under GEQO.
- 7ad6498fd5a6 12.0 cited
- d70c147fa217 11.3 cited
-
Disable support for partitionwise joins in problematic cases.
- 7cfdc77023ad 12.0 cited
-
Add plan_cache_mode setting
- f7cb2842bf47 12.0 cited
-
Add test for partitionwise join involving default partition.
- 4513d3a4be0b 12.0 cited
-
Revise API for partition_rbound_cmp/partition_rbound_datum_cmp.
- b0229235564f 11.0 landed
Hi, On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 1:24 PM amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 2:40 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> CFbot complains that Fujita-san submitted a patch that doesn't apply, >> which makes sense since the necessary previous patch was only referred >> to without being resubmitted. I suggest to always post all patches >> together with each resubmission so that it can be checked automatically >> by the cf bot: http://commitfest.cputube.org/etsuro-fujita.html > Understood and sorry about that. Sorry about that. >> I'm not clear on who the author of this patch is, now. Also, I'm not >> sure what the *status* is. Are we waiting for Fujita-san to review this >> patch? > Yes, we are waiting for Fujita-san to review. Fujita-san has started a review > and proposed some enhancement which I reviewed in the last update. > > I think soon Fujita-san might post the complete patch including his changes. I'm a bit busy with something else recently, but I'll do that ASAP. And I'll continue to review the other part of the patch. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita