Amit-san On Wednesday, July 8, 2020 11:53 AM, Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com>: > I think the only reason that this is not supported is that I hadn't tested > such a > query when developing partition pruning, nor did anyone else suggest doing > so. :)
Thanks for the information. I'm relieved to hear this reason. Regards, Sho kato > -----Original Message----- > From: Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 8, 2020 11:53 AM > To: Kato, Sho/加藤 翔 <kato-...@fujitsu.com> > Cc: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fuj...@gmail.com>; PostgreSQL-development > <pgsql-hack...@postgresql.org> > Subject: Re: Performing partition pruning using row value > > Kato-san, > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 10:32 AM kato-...@fujitsu.com > <kato-...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 7, 2020 6:31 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fuj...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Just to be clear, the condition (c1, c2) < (99, 99) is not > > > equivalent to the condition c1 < 99 and c2 < 99 (see the documentation > note in [1]). > > > > Thanks for sharing this document. I have understood. > > > > > but I don't think the main reason for that is that it takes time to > > > parse expressions. > > I think the only reason that this is not supported is that I hadn't tested > such a > query when developing partition pruning, nor did anyone else suggest doing > so. :) > > > > Yeah, I think it's great to support row-wise comparison not only > > > with the small number of args but with the large number of them. > > +1 > > > These comments are very helpful. > > Ok, I try to make POC that allows row-wise comparison with > partition-pruning. > > That would be great, thank you. > > -- > Amit Langote > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
