On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Yeah. I think the code in mark_dummy_rel is newer and better-thought-out >> than what's in create_unique_path. It probably makes sense to change over. > > I did a bit of archaeology here. create_unique_path() first appears > in commit bdfbfde1b168b3332c4cdac34ac86a80aaf4d442 (vintage 2003), > where it used GetMemoryChunkContext(rel). Commit > f41803bb39bc2949db200116a609fd242d0ec221 (vintage 2007) changed it to > use root->planner_cxt, but neither the comment changes in that patch > nor the commit message give any hint as to the motivation for the > change. The comments do mention that it should be kept in sync with > best_inner_indexscan(), which was also switched to use > root->planner_cxt by that commit, again without any real explanation > as to why, and best_inner_indexscan() continued to use > root->planner_cxt until its demise in commit > e2fa76d80ba571d4de8992de6386536867250474 (vintage 2012). Meanwhile, > mark_dummy_rel() didn't switch contexts at all until commit > eca75a12a27d28b972fc269c1c8813cd8eb15441 (vintage 2011) at which point > it began using GetMemoryChunkContext(rel).
Thanks a lot for digging into the history. > > All of which, I think, is a long-winded way of saying that I'm going > to go commit this patch. Thanks a lot for the commit. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company
