Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [PATCHES] Partitioning docs

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Partitioning docs
Date: 2005-11-02 23:57:39
Message-ID: 1130975859.6884.54.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-patches
On Wed, 2005-02-11 at 19:55 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Trying to identify which bit of advice you refer to.... I put some
> comments in based upon feedback from the beta on specific queries that
> were not optimised the same as non-inherited tables.

ISTM that query optimization *always* works differently for inherited
versus non-inherited tables, so there are a wide variety of queries you
could describe like that.

The other problem is the documentation is sufficiently vague that it is
of little use, IMHO. Simply saying "query X is optimized differently"
without explaining what causes the difference, what the performance
impact is likely to be, or how to workaround the problem isn't likely to
be very helpful.


In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Mikael CarneholmDate: 2005-11-07 16:33:38
Subject: Partitioning docs RFC
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2005-11-02 19:55:18
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Partitioning docs

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-11-03 00:12:44
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2005-11-02 23:32:31
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group