Re: Some incorrect comments and out-dated README from run-time pruning

2018-11-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 09/10/2018 22:25, David Rowley wrote: > On 10 October 2018 at 02:38, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: >> - * subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] are indexed by partition index (where >> - * zero is the topmost partition, and non-leaf partitions must come before >> - * their children). For a leaf partitio

Re: Some incorrect comments and out-dated README from run-time pruning

2018-10-09 Thread David Rowley
On 10 October 2018 at 02:38, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > - * subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] are indexed by partition index (where > - * zero is the topmost partition, and non-leaf partitions must come before > - * their children). For a leaf partition p, subplan_map[p] contains the > + * subplan_m

Re: Some incorrect comments and out-dated README from run-time pruning

2018-10-09 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 27/09/2018 23:20, David Rowley wrote: > I've noticed that the comments above the PartitionedRelPruneInfo > struct incorrectly document how subplan_map and subpart_map are > indexed. This seems to have snuck in on 4e232364033. - * subplan_map[] and subpart_map[] are indexed by partition index (w

Re: Some incorrect comments and out-dated README from run-time pruning

2018-09-30 Thread David Rowley
On 28 September 2018 at 09:20, David Rowley wrote: > I've noticed that the comments above the PartitionedRelPruneInfo > struct incorrectly document how subplan_map and subpart_map are > indexed. This seems to have snuck in on 4e232364033. > > Also, while reading the executor README file, I noticed

Some incorrect comments and out-dated README from run-time pruning

2018-09-27 Thread David Rowley
I've noticed that the comments above the PartitionedRelPruneInfo struct incorrectly document how subplan_map and subpart_map are indexed. This seems to have snuck in on 4e232364033. Also, while reading the executor README file, I noticed that we mentioned that executor nodes are created one for on