On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 13:43, Arne Roland wrote:
> That being said, attached patch should fix the issue reported below.
I took a look over the v10 patch and ended up making adjustments to
the tests. I didn't quite see the need for the test to be as extensive
as you had them in v10. Neither join
Freund
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 2:36:59 AM
To: Arne Roland
Cc: David Rowley; Amit Langote; pgsql-hackers; Zhihong Yu; Alvaro Herrera;
Julien Rouhaud
Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
Hi,
On 2022-11-02 01:50:38 +, Arne Roland wrote:
> I mainly chan
Hi,
On 2022-11-02 01:50:38 +, Arne Roland wrote:
> I mainly changed the comments, the Assert and some casing.
The tests have been failing for a while
https://cirrus-ci.com/github/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/commitfest/40/3452
https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/task/6190372803051520/logs/cores.log
Hi!
I mainly changed the comments, the Assert and some casing.
> From: David Rowley
> Sent: Monday, October 3, 2022 00:51
>
> * In the header comment in get_relation_info(), I don't think we need
> to mention join removals explicitly. At a stretch, maybe mentioning
> "unique proofs" might be
David Rowley writes:
> * I can't quite figure out why you're doing "DROP TABLE a CASCADE;" in
> inherits.sql. You've not changed anything else in that file. Did you
> mean to do this in join.sql?
Doing that would be a bad idea no matter where it's done. IIRC,
those tables are intentionally set
On Sun, 2 Oct 2022 at 05:34, Arne Roland wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 4:53 PM David Rowley wrote:
> > Arne sent me an off-list
> > message to say he's planning on working on the patch that uses the
> > existing field instead of the new one he originally added. Let's hold
> > off for that
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 4:53 PM David Rowley wrote:
> Arne sent me an off-list
> message to say he's planning on working on the patch that uses the
> existing field instead of the new one he originally added. Let's hold
> off for that patch.
I wouldn't say, I explicitly stated that. But I ended
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 4:53 PM David Rowley wrote:
> Thank you for having a look at the patch.
>
> On Tue, 20 Sept 2022 at 18:41, Amit Langote wrote:
> > Agreed, though the patch's changes to tests does not seem to have to
> > do with join removal? I don't really understand what the test
Thank you for having a look at the patch.
On Tue, 20 Sept 2022 at 18:41, Amit Langote wrote:
> Agreed, though the patch's changes to tests does not seem to have to
> do with join removal? I don't really understand what the test changes
> are all about. I wonder why the patch doesn't instead
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 1:08 PM David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 at 11:07, Arne Roland wrote:
> > Attached a rebased version of the patch.
> Firstly, I agree that we should fix the issue of join removals not
> working with partitioned tables.
Agreed, though the patch's changes to tests
On Sun, 18 Sept 2022 at 07:00, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > After a bit of trawling through the archives, I found it here:
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180124162006.pmapfiznhgngwtjf%40alvherre.pgsql
> > I think there was insufficient discussion and you're
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> On 2022-Sep-16, David Rowley wrote:
>> I kinda disagree with Alvaro's fix in 05fb5d661. I think indexlist is
>> the place to store these details. That commit added the following
>> comment:
>>
>> /*
>> * Ignore partitioned indexes, since they are not usable for
>> *
On 2022-Sep-16, David Rowley wrote:
> I kinda disagree with Alvaro's fix in 05fb5d661. I think indexlist is
> the place to store these details. That commit added the following
> comment:
>
> /*
> * Ignore partitioned indexes, since they are not usable for
> * queries.
> */
>
> But neither are
On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 at 11:07, Arne Roland wrote:
> Attached a rebased version of the patch.
Firstly, I agree that we should fix the issue of join removals not
working with partitioned tables.
I had a quick look over this and the first thing that I thought was
the same as what Amit mentioned in:
Hi!
Attached a rebased version of the patch.
Regards
Arne
From: Arne Roland
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 19:14
To: Amit Langote
Cc: Zhihong Yu; Alvaro Herrera; Julien Rouhaud; pgsql-hackers
Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
Hi!
From: Amit Langote
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 09:04
Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
> [...]
> "partindexlist" really made me think about a list of "partial indexes"
> for some reason. I think maybe "partedin
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Arne Roland wrote:
> The comment at my end goes on:
>
> /*
> * Don't add partitioned indexes to the indexlist, since they are
> * not usable by the executor. If they are unique add them to the
> * partindexlist instead, to use for further pruning. If they
> *
Hi!
> From: Zhihong Yu
> Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
>
> Hi,
>
> - if (indexRelation->rd_rel->relkind == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_INDEX)
> + if (inhparent && (!index->indisuniqu
On 2022-Jan-19, Arne Roland wrote:
> > a) make sure that the submitted patch updates these test results so
> > that the test pass [...]
>
> Just for the record: I did run the tests, but I did miss that the
> commit of Tomas fix for fractional optimization is already on the
> master. Please note
Sent:* Wednesday, January 19, 2022 10:13:55 PM
> *To:* Alvaro Herrera; Julien Rouhaud
> *Cc:* pgsql-hackers
> *Subject:* Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
>
>
> Hi!
>
> > From: Alvaro Herrera
> > [...]
> > Hmm, these plan cha
added it
for potential future clarity.
Thanks for your feedback again!
Regards
Arne
From: Arne Roland
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 10:13:55 PM
To: Alvaro Herrera; Julien Rouhaud
Cc: pgsql-hackers
Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned
Hi!
> From: Alvaro Herrera
> [...]
> Hmm, these plan changes look valid to me. A left self-join using the
> primary key column? That looks optimizable all right.
> [...]
> What I still don't know is whether this patch is actually desirable or
> not. If the only cases it affects is self-joins,
On 2022-Jan-18, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> SET enable_partitionwise_join = on;
> EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF)
> SELECT * FROM fract_t x LEFT JOIN fract_t y USING (id) ORDER BY id ASC LIMIT
> 10;
> - QUERY PLAN
>
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 08:32:40PM +, Arne Roland wrote:
>
> Afaiac the join pruning where the outer table is a partitioned table is the
> relevant case.
The last version of the patch now fails on all platform, with plan changes.
For instance:
: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
Hmm, can you show cases of queries for which having this new
partIndexlist changes plans?
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Saca el libro que tu religión considere como el indicado para encontr
Hmm, can you show cases of queries for which having this new
partIndexlist changes plans?
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Saca el libro que tu religión considere como el indicado para encontrar la
oración que traiga paz a tu alma. Luego rebootea
Using some valuable feedback from Zhihong Yu, I fixed a flipped negation error
and updated the comments.
Regards
Arne
From: Arne Roland
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2022 12:25
To: Julien Rouhaud
Cc: pgsql-hackers
Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist
Hi,
thank you for the heads up! Those files ended up accidentally in the dump from
me running pg_indent. The file count was truly excessive, I should have noticed
this sooner.
I attached the patch without the excessive modifications. That should be way
easier to read.
Regards
Arne
diff
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 01:44:31PM +, Arne Roland wrote:
>
> The attached patch takes that route. I'd appreciate feedback!
The cfbot reports that the patch doesn't apply anymore:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_36_3452.log
=== Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID
Hi,
I stumbled across a few places that depend on the inheritance appends being
applied at a later date, so I quickly abandoned that idea. I thought a bit
about the indexlist, in particular the inhparent, and I am not sure what
depends on get_relation_info working in that way.
Therefore I
Hi,
I did a bit of testing today and noticed that we don't set indexlist properly
at the right time in some cases when using partitioned tables.
I attached a simple case where the indexlist doesn't seems to be set at the
right time. get_relation_info in plancat.c seems to process it only
31 matches
Mail list logo
