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

Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>
Cc: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...
Date: 2010-10-29 17:31:32
Message-ID: 4207.1288373492@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> writes:
> BTW can someone explain to me which are the cases where the
> patch actually helps?

Cases with lots of irrelevant indexes.  Zoltan's example had 4 indexes
per child table, only one of which was relevant to the query.  In your
test case there are no irrelevant indexes, which is why the runtime
didn't change.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-29 17:44:14
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...
Previous:From: Leonardo FrancalanciDate: 2010-10-29 17:22:12
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group