Hi Alexander,
Thank you for the check! I marked the patch "ready for committer". Best regards, Etsuro Fujita From: Alexander Korotkov [mailto:aekorot...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 1:26 AM To: Etsuro Fujita Cc: Tom Lane; pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch for removng unused targets Hi Etsuro! On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.ets...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: Hi Alexander, I wrote: > > > From: Tom Lane [mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us] > > > > resjunk means that the target is not supposed to be output by the query. > > > Since it's there at all, it's presumably referenced by ORDER BY or GROUP > > > BY or DISTINCT ON, but the meaning of the flag doesn't depend on that. > > > > What you would need to do is verify that the target is resjunk and not > > > used in any clause besides ORDER BY. I have not read your patch, but > > > I rather imagine that what you've got now is that the parser checks this > > > and sets the new flag for consumption far downstream. Why not just make > > > the same check in the planner? > > > I've created a patch using this approach. > > I've rebased the above patch against the latest head. Could you review the > patch? If you have no objection, I'd like to mark the patch "ready for > committer". Sorry, I've had a cleanup of the patch. Please find attached the patch. I've checked the attached patch. It looks good for me. No objection to mark it "ready for committer". ------ With best regards, Alexander Korotkov.
