On 30 July 2018 at 20:26, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > I couldn't find much to complain about in the latest v3, except I noticed > a few instances of the word "setup" where I think what's really meant is > "set up". > > + * must be setup, but any sub-partitioned tables can be setup lazily as > > + * A ResultRelInfo has not been setup for this partition yet, >
Great. I've fixed those and also fixed a few other comments. I found the comments on PartitionTupleRouting didn't really explain how the arrays were indexed. I've made an attempt to make that clear. I've attached a complete v4 patch. > By the way, when going over the updated code, I noticed that the code > around child_parent_tupconv_maps could use some refactoring too. > Especially, I noticed that ExecSetupChildParentMapForLeaf() allocates > child-to-parent map array needed for transition tuple capture even if not > needed by any of the leaf partitions. I'm attaching here a patch that > applies on top of your v3 to show what I'm thinking we could do. Maybe we can do that as a follow-on patch. I think what we have so far is already ended up quite complex to review. What do you think? -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
v4-0001-Speed-up-INSERT-and-UPDATE-on-partitioned-tables.patch
Description: Binary data
