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 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 b12fd41c695b43c76b0a9a4d19ba43b05536440c. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers