Hi,
The cfbot reports some clang warning on the last version of the patchset:
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6721617647632384
[16:35:24.444] partprune.c:2775:8: error: explicitly assigning value of
variable of type 'int' to itself [-Werror,-Wself-assign]
[16:35:24.444] off =
On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 7:26 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
>
> > -* For range partitioning, we must only perform pruning with values
> > -* for either all partition keys or a prefix thereof.
> > +* For range partitioning and list partitioning, we must only
> > perform
> > +
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:34 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> ---
>
> > + if (isnulls && isnulls[i])
> > + cmpval = 0; /* NULL "=" NULL */
> > + else
> > + cmpval = 1; /* NULL ">" not-NULL */
> > + }
> > + else if (isnulls && isnulls[i]
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 2:47 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 7:04 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:37 PM Ashutosh Sharma
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Is this okay?
>> >
>> > postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int) PARTITION BY LIST ( a, a, a );
>>
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 7:04 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:37 PM Ashutosh Sharma
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is this okay?
> >
> > postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int) PARTITION BY LIST ( a, a, a );
> > CREATE TABLE
> >
> > postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1_1 PARTITI
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:37 PM Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Is this okay?
>
> postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int) PARTITION BY LIST ( a, a, a );
> CREATE TABLE
>
> postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1_1 PARTITION OF t1 FOR VALUES IN ((1, 2, 3), (4, 5,
> 6));
> CREATE TABLE
>
> postgres=#
Hi,
Is this okay?
postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1 (a int, b int) PARTITION BY LIST ( a, a, a );
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# CREATE TABLE t1_1 PARTITION OF t1 FOR VALUES IN ((1, 2, 3), (4,
5, 6));
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# \d t1
Partitioned table "public.t1"
Column | Type | Collation | Nulla
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 12:43 PM Amul Sul wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 12:03 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amul Sul wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:24 AM Amit Langote
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > []
> > > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:57 PM Nitin Jadh
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 12:03 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amul Sul wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:24 AM Amit Langote
> > wrote:
> > >
> > []
> > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:57 PM Nitin Jadhav
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Looks difficult to understand at first g
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amul Sul wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:24 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> []
> > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:57 PM Nitin Jadhav
> > wrote:
> > > > Looks difficult to understand at first glance, how about the following:
> > > >
> > > > if (b1->isnulls != b2->isn
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:24 AM Amit Langote wrote:
>
[]
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:57 PM Nitin Jadhav
> wrote:
> > > Looks difficult to understand at first glance, how about the following:
> > >
> > > if (b1->isnulls != b2->isnulls)
> > >return false;
>
> I don't think having this block
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 2:54 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> Hi Nitin,
>
> Was looking at warnings generated by v8:
>
> partbounds.c:971:17: warning: unused variable 'b1_isnull' [-Wunused-variable]
> boolb1_isnull = false;
>
Hi Nitin,
Was looking at warnings generated by v8:
partbounds.c:971:17: warning: unused variable 'b1_isnull' [-Wunused-variable]
boolb1_isnull = false;
^
partbounds.c:972:17: warning: unused variable 'b2_isnull' [
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 7:27 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> Thank you for reviewing the patch.
>
> > partbounds.c: In function ‘get_qual_for_list.isra.18’:
> > partbounds.c:4284:29: warning: ‘boundinfo’ may be used uninitialized
> > in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
> > datumCopy(bound_i
Hi,
Few comments for v7 patch, note that I haven't been through the
previous discussion, if any of the review comments that has been
already discussed & overridden, then please ignore here too:
partbounds.c: In function ‘get_qual_for_list.isra.18’:
partbounds.c:4284:29: warning: ‘boundinfo’ may
> I noticed that there's no commitfest entry for this. Will you please
> add this to the next one?
I have added it to Nov commitfest.
Thanks & Regards,
Nitin Jadhav
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 1:40 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> Hi Nitin,
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 6:48 PM Nitin Jadhav
> wrote:
> >
Hi Nitin,
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 6:48 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> Thanks for sharing. I have fixed the issue in the attached patch.
I noticed that there's no commitfest entry for this. Will you please
add this to the next one?
--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 3:50 AM Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 2:48 AM Nitin Jadhav <
> nitinjadhavpostg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > While testing further I got a crash with partition wise join enabled
>> for multi-col list partitions. please find test case & stack-trace below.
>
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 2:48 AM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> > While testing further I got a crash with partition wise join enabled for
> multi-col list partitions. please find test case & stack-trace below.
>
> Thanks for sharing. I have fixed the issue in the attached patch.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Ni
Hi Rajkumar,
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 2:36 PM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
wrote:
>
> Thanks for the patch, it applied cleanly and fixed the reported issue. I
> observed another case where
> In case of multi-col list partition on the same column query is not picking
> partition wise join. Is this expec
Hi Nitin,
While testing further I got a crash with partition wise join enabled for
multi-col list partitions. please find test case & stack-trace below.
SET enable_partitionwise_join TO on;
CREATE TABLE plt1 (c varchar, d varchar) PARTITION BY LIST(c,d);
CREATE TABLE plt1_p1 PARTITION OF plt1 FOR
Thanks for the patch, it applied cleanly and fixed the reported issue. I
observed another case where
In case of multi-col list partition on the same column query is not picking
partition wise join. Is this expected?
CREATE TABLE plt1 (a int, b int, c varchar) PARTITION BY LIST(c,c);
CREATE TABLE
Thanks Nitin,
v4 patches applied cleanly and make check is passing now. While testing
further I observed that if multiple values are given for a single
column list partition it is not giving error instead it is changing values
itself. Please find the example below.
postgres=# CREATE TABLE plt1 (a
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 6:56 AM Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:17 PM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
> wrote:
> > On PG head + Nitin's v3 patch + Amit's Delta patch. Make check is
> failing with below errors.
>
> Thanks Rajkumar for testing.
>
> > --inherit.sql is failing with erro
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:17 PM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
wrote:
> On PG head + Nitin's v3 patch + Amit's Delta patch. Make check is failing
> with below errors.
Thanks Rajkumar for testing.
> --inherit.sql is failing with error :"ERROR: negative bitmapset member not
> allowed"
> update mlpa
On PG head + Nitin's v3 patch + Amit's Delta patch. Make check is failing
with below errors.
--inherit.sql is failing with error :"ERROR: negative bitmapset member not
allowed"
update mlparted_tab mlp set c = 'xxx'
from
(select a from some_tab union all select a+1 from some_tab) ss (a)
where (
On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 2:31 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:02 PM Nitin Jadhav
> wrote:
> > The attached patch also fixes the above comments.
>
> I noticed that multi-column list partitions containing NULLs don't
> work correctly with partition pruning yet.
>
> create table p0
Hi Nitin,
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:02 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> The attached patch also fixes the above comments.
I noticed that multi-column list partitions containing NULLs don't
work correctly with partition pruning yet.
create table p0 (a int, b text, c bool) partition by list (a, b, c);
cr
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 4:51 PM Rajkumar Raghuwanshi
wrote:
>
> Hi Nitin.
>
> I have been testing these patches. Patches applied cleanly on the head. While
> testing I found below a case where update row movement is not working
> properly.
> Please find the test case below.
>
> postgres=# create
Hi Nitin.
I have been testing these patches. Patches applied cleanly on the head.
While testing I found below a case where update row movement is not working
properly.
Please find the test case below.
postgres=# create table p0 (a int, b text, c bool) partition by list
(a,b,c);
CREATE TABLE
postg
> + * isnulls is an array of boolean-tuples with key->partnatts booleans values
> + * each. Currently only used for list partitioning, it stores whether a
>
> I think 'booleans' should be 'boolean'.
> The trailing word 'each' is unnecessary.
> bq. Supported new syantx to allow mentioning multiple
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 5:41 AM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> > The new list bound binary search and related comparison support
> > function look a bit too verbose to me. I was expecting
> > partition_list_bsearch() to look very much like
> > partition_range_datum_bsearch(), but that is not the case. T
On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 8:38 PM Amit Langote
wrote:
> Hi Nitin,
>
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 11:45 PM Nitin Jadhav
> wrote:
> > > I'll wait for you to post a new patch addressing at least the comments
> > > in my earlier email. Also, please make sure to run `make check`
> > > successfully before
On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 12:37 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> I will look at other parts of the patch next week hopefully. For
> now, attached is a delta patch that applies on top of your v1, which
> does:
>
> * Simplify partition_list_bsearch() and partition_lbound_datum_cmp()
> * Make qsort_partition
Hi Nitin,
On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 11:45 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> > I'll wait for you to post a new patch addressing at least the comments
> > in my earlier email. Also, please make sure to run `make check`
> > successfully before posting the patch. :)
>
> I have fixed all of the review comments g
> Approach 1 sounds better. It sounds like approach 1 might help us
> implement support for allowing NULLs in range partition bounds in the
> future, if at all. For now, it might be better to not allocate the
> isnull array except for list partitioning.
Thanks for confirming.
> I'll wait for yo
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 6:49 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
> > IMO, it is not such a bad syntax from a user's PoV. It's not hard to
> > understand from this syntax that the partition constraint is something
> > like (a, b) = (1, 2) OR (a, b) = (1, 5) OR ..., where the = performs
> > row-wise comparison.
> Yes, it would be nice to have this. Thanks for picking this up.
Thanks for confirming.
> Some quick observations:
Thanks for providing the comments. I will handle these cases.
> Hmm, why not have parentheses around these lists, that is: (
> (list_of_values) [, ...] )
>
> So your example woul
On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:02 PM Amit Langote wrote:
> I will now take a look at the patch itself.
Some quick observations:
* I get a lot of instances of the following 2 warnings when compiling
the patched code:
Warning #1:
partprune.c: In function ‘get_matching_list_bounds’:
partprune.c:2731:1
Hello Nitin,
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 11:03 PM Nitin Jadhav
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While reviewing one of the 'Table partitioning' related patches, I found that
> Postgres does not support multiple column based LIST partitioning. Based on
> this understanding, I have started working on this feature.
Thanks Jeevan for looking into this thread.
> I did not review the patch in detail, but a quick look at it leaves me
> with following comments:
I will incorporate these changes.
> ...FOR VALUES IN (1, 2, 3, 4), (11, 22, 33, 44), where the first set
> is the list for values of column A and second
> While reviewing one of the 'Table partitioning' related patches,
> I found that Postgres does not support multiple column based LIST
> partitioning. Based on this understanding, I have started working on
> this feature. I also feel that 'Multi-Column List Partitioning' can
> be benefited to the P
42 matches
Mail list logo
