On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > [2] had a patch with some changes to the original patch you posted. I > didn't describe those changes in my mail, since they rearranged the > comments. Those changes are not part of this patch and you haven't > comments about those changes as well. If you have intentionally > excluded those changes, it's fine. In case, you haven't reviewed them, > please see if they are good to be incorporated.
I took a quick look at your version but I think I like Amit's fine the way it is, so committed that and back-patched it to v10. I find 0002 pretty ugly as things stand. We get a bunch of tuple maps that we don't really need, only to turn around and free them. We get a bunch of tuple slots that we don't need, only to turn around and drop them. We don't really need the PartitionDispatch objects either, except for the OIDs they contain. There's a lot of extra stuff being computed here that is really irrelevant for this purpose. I think we should try to clean that up somehow. -- 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: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
