On 4 April 2018 at 19:04, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > On 2018/04/04 14:42, Amit Langote wrote: >> Attached v48. > > I had forgotten to remove the static_pruning parameter I had added in the > v47, because it is no longer used. Static pruning now occurs even if a > step contains all Params, in which case each of > get_matching_hash/list/range_bounds() functions returns offsets of all > non-null datums, because the Params cannot be resolved to actual values > during static pruning.
Thanks for updating. I've made a pass over v49 and I didn't find very much wrong with it. The only real bug I found was a missing IsA(rinfo->clause, Const) in the pseudoconstant check inside generate_partition_pruning_steps_internal. Most of the changes are comment fixes with a few stylistic changes thrown which are pretty much all there just to try to shrink the code a line or two or reduce indentation. I feel pretty familiar with this code now and assuming the attached is included I'm happy for someone else, hopefully, a committer to take a look at it. I'll leave the following notes: 1. Still not sure about RelOptInfo->has_default_part. This flag is only looked at in generate_partition_pruning_steps. The RelOptInfo and the boundinfo is available to look at, it's just that the partition_bound_has_default macro is defined in partition.c rather than partition.h. 2. Don't really like the new isopne variable name. It's not very simple to decode, perhaps something like is_not_eq is better? 3. The part of the code I'm least familiar with is get_steps_using_prefix_recurse(). I admit to not having had time to fully understand that and consider ways to break it. Marking as ready for committer. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Description: Binary data