At Fri, 9 Aug 2019 14:02:36 +0900, Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote
in <ca+hiwqgm18b8uq5sip_nsnymdihtoavorvcpumo_bbxtxhp...@mail.gmail.com>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 1:17 PM Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 12:09 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > At Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:50:54 +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > > > When working on it, I realized
> > > > that the way RelOptInfo.partition_qual is processed is a bit
> > > > duplicative, so I created a separate patch to make that a bit more
> > > > consistent.
> > >
> > > 0001 seems reasonable. By the way, the patch doesn't touch
> > > get_relation_constraints(), but I suppose it can use the modified
> > > partition constraint qual already stored in rel->partition_qual
> > > in set_relation_partition_info. And we could move constifying to
> > > set_rlation_partition_info?
> >
> > Ah, good advice. This make partition constraint usage within the
> > planner quite a bit more consistent.
>
> Hmm, oops. I think that judgement was a bit too rushed on my part. I
> unintentionally ended up making the partition constraint to *always*
> be fetched, whereas we don't need it in most cases. I've reverted
(v2 has been withdrawn before I see it:p)
Yeah, I agreed. It is needed only by (sub)partition parents.
> that change. RelOptInfo.partition_qual is poorly named in retrospect.
> :( It's not set for all partitions, only those that are partitioned
> themselves.
>
> Attached updated patches.
+++ b/src/backend/optimizer/util/plancat.c
@@ -1267,10 +1267,14 @@ get_relation_constraints(PlannerInfo *root,
*/
if (include_partition && relation->rd_rel->relispartition)
{
...
+ else
{
+ /* Nope, fetch from the relcache. */
I seems to me that include_partition is true both and only for
modern and old-fasheoned partition parents.
set_relation_partition_info() is currently called only for modern
partition parents. If we need that at the place above,
set_relation_partition_info can be called also for old-fashioned
partition parent, and get_relation_constraints may forget the
else case in a broad way.
+ /* Nope, fetch from the relcache. */
+ List *pcqual = RelationGetPartitionQual(relation);
If the comment above is right, This would be duplicate. What we
should do instaed is only eval_const_expression. And we could
move it to set_relation_partition_info completely. Consitify must
be useful in both cases.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
