On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Amit Langote
<langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2016/06/08 23:16, Amit Langote wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote:
>>>> [Action required within 72 hours.  This is a generic notification.]
>>>> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item.  Robert,
>>>> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this 
>>>> open
>>>> item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as 
>>>> a
>>>> 9.6 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the policy on
>>>> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this
>>>> message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
>>>> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all 
>>>> fixed
>>>> well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1.  Consequently, I will appreciate your
>>>> efforts toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
>>> Discussion of this issue is still ongoing.  Accordingly, I intend to
>>> wait until that discussion has concluded before proceeding further.
>>> I'll check this thread again no later than Friday and send an update
>>> by then.
>> Ashutosh seemed OK with the latest patch.
> I adjusted some comments per off-list suggestion from Ashutosh.  Please
> find attached the new version.

Are PlaceHolderVars the only problem we need to worry about here?
What about other expressions that creep into the target list during
subquery pull-up which are not safe to push down?  See comments in
set_append_rel_size(), recent discussion on the thread "Failed
assertion in parallel worker (ExecInitSubPlan)", and commit

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to