On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 01:54:27PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Thanks for the updated patch. I don't have any comments, except that
> the text I suggested couple of weeks ago no longer reads clear:
I have spent a couple of extra hours on the patch, and committed it.
There was one issue in logica
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 11:57 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 06:03:12PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Sorry I don't understand this. Do you mean we should rename the
> > routines left behind in tupconvert.c? For example,
> > convert_tuples_by_name() doesn't real
On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 06:03:12PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 5:03 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I see. That saved me some time, thanks. It is not really intuitive
>> to name routines about tuple conversion from tupconvert.c to
>> attrmap.c, so I'd think about renaming th
Thanks for the updated patch.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 5:03 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:55:50PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Actually, I was just suggesting that we create a new function
> > convert_tuples_by_position_map() and put the logic that compares the
> > two Tu
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 05:55:50PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Actually, I was just suggesting that we create a new function
> convert_tuples_by_position_map() and put the logic that compares the
> two TupleDescs to create the AttrMap in it, just like
> convert_tuples_by_name_map(). Now you could
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 4:57 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 02:21:41PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Actually, we should also refactor
> > convert_tuples_by_position() to carve out the code that builds the
> > AttrMap into a separate function and move it to attmap.c.
>
> Not
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 02:21:41PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Thanks for working on this. I guess this is a follow up to:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20191102052001.GB1614%40paquier.xyz
Exactly. I got that in my mind for a couple of days, so I gave it a
shot and the result was kind
Hi Michael,
Thanks for working on this. I guess this is a follow up to:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20191102052001.GB1614%40paquier.xyz
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 1:26 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After working on dc816e58, I have noticed that what we are doing with
> attrib
Hi all,
After working on dc816e58, I have noticed that what we are doing with
attribute mappings is not that good. In a couple of code paths of the
rewriter, the executor, and more particularly ALTER TABLE, when
working on the creation of inherited relations or partitions an
attribute mapping get
