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 flat)
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.

-Neil



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 © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group