On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 at 19:58, Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, the ExecLockRelsInfo node in the current patch, that first gets > added to the QueryDesc and subsequently to the EState of the query, > serves as that stashing place. Not sure if you've looked at > ExecLockRelInfo in detail in your review of the patch so far, but it > carries the initial pruning result in what are called > PlanInitPruningOutput nodes, which are stored in a list in > ExecLockRelsInfo and their offsets in the list are in turn stored in > an adjacent array that contains an element for every plan node in the > tree. If we go with a PlannedStmt.partpruneinfos list, then maybe we > don't need to have that array, because the Append/MergeAppend nodes > would be carrying those offsets by themselves.
I saw it, just not in great detail. I saw that you had an array that was indexed by the plan node's ID. I thought that wouldn't be so good with large complex plans that we often get with partitioning workloads. That's why I mentioned using another index that you store in Append/MergeAppend that starts at 0 and increments by 1 for each node that has a PartitionPruneInfo made for it during create_plan. > Maybe a different name for ExecLockRelsInfo would be better? > > Also, given Tom's apparent dislike for carrying that in PlannedStmt, > maybe the way I have it now is fine? I think if you change how it's indexed and the other stuff then we can have another look. I think the patch will be much easier to review once the ParitionPruneInfos are moved into PlannedStmt. David