Re: Query performance problems with partitioned tables

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Andreas Haumer" <andreas(at)xss(dot)co(dot)at>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query performance problems with partitioned tables
Date: 2007-04-30 19:19:16
Message-ID: 87lkg9r7pn.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


Wait, rereading the original queries I seem to have misunderstood something.
The individual parts of the partitioned tables are being accessed in timestamp
order. So what's missing is some way for the optimizer to know that the
resulting append results will still be in order. If it knew that all the
constraints were mutually exclusive and covered ascending ranges then it could
avoid doing the extra sort. Hm...

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2007-05-01 16:23:47 Re: Feature Request --- was: PostgreSQL Performance Tuning
Previous Message Kevin Hunter 2007-04-30 17:30:05 Re: Feature Request --- was: PostgreSQL Performance Tuning