On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 1:00 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:57:57AM +0900, Amit Langote wrote: > > Maybe partition_bounds_create() should've had a MemoryContext argument to > > pass it the context we want it to create the PartitionBoundInfo in. That > > way, we can simply pass rd_pdcxt to it and avoid making a copy. As is, > > we're now allocating two copies of PartitionBoundInfo, one in the > > CurrentMemoryContext and another in rd_pdcxt, whereas the previous code > > would only allocate the latter. Maybe we should fix it as being a > > regression. > > Not sure about what you mean by regression here,
The regression is, as I mentioned, that the new code allocates two copies of PartitionBoundInfo whereas only one would be allocated before. > but passing the memory > context as an argument has sense as you can remove the extra partition > bound copy, as it has sense to use an array instead of a list for > performance, which may matter if many partitions are handled when > building the cache. So cleaning up both things at the same time would > be nice. Maybe, the patch to add the memory context argument to partition_bound_create and other related static functions in partbound.c should be its own patch, as that seems to be a separate issue. OTOH, other changes needed to implement Robert's proposal of using PartitionBoundSpec and Oid arrays instead of existing lists should be in the same patch. Thanks, Amit
