On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think in the final changes after applying all 3 patches, the > redundant tuple slot is no longer present. But ... >> We don't really need the PartitionDispatch objects either, >> except for the OIDs they contain. There's a lot of extra stuff being >> computed here that is really irrelevant for this purpose. I think we >> should try to clean that up somehow. > ... I am of the same opinion. That's why - as I mentioned upthread - I > was thinking why not have a separate light-weight function to just > generate oids, and keep RelationGetPartitionDispatchInfo() intact, to > be used only for tuple routing. > > But, I haven't yet checked Ashuthosh's requirements, which suggest > that it does not help to even get the oid list. >
0004 patch in partition-wise join patchset has code to expand partition hierarchy. That patch is expanding inheritance hierarchy in depth first manner. Robert commented that instead of depth first manner, it will be better if we expand it in partitioned tables first manner. With the latest changes in your patch-set I don't see the reason for expanding in partitioned tables first order. Can you please elaborate if we still need to expand in partitioned table first manner? May be we should just address the expansion issue in 0004 instead of dividing it in two patches. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
