Works great - plans no longer sort, but rather use indices as expected. It's in use in Greenplum now.
It's a simple approach, should easily extend from gpdb to postgres. The patch is against gpdb so someone needs to 'port' it.
Msg is shrt cuz m on ma treo
From: Simon Riggs [mailto:simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com]
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 05:34 PM Eastern Standard Time
To: Luke Lonergan
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas; Anton; pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] partitioned table and ORDER BY indexed_field DESCLIMIT 1
On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 15:12 -0400, Luke Lonergan wrote:
> And I repeat - 'we fixed that and submitted a patch' - you can find it
> in the unapplied patches queue.
I got the impression it was a suggestion rather than a tested patch,
forgive me if that was wrong.
Did the patch work? Do you have timings/different plan?
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Pablo Alcaraz||Date: 2007-10-27 22:31:18|
|Subject: Re: Speed difference between select ... union select ...
and select from partitioned_table|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2007-10-27 21:31:22|
|Subject: Re: partitioned table and ORDER BY indexed_field DESCLIMIT 1|