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

Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...

From: PostgreSQL - Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...
Date: 2010-09-03 12:16:21
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sep 3, 2010, at 2:04 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:

> * PostgreSQL - Hans-Jürgen Schönig (postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at) wrote:
>> did anybody think of a solution to this problem.
>> or more precisely: can there be a solution to this problem?
> Please post to the correct list (-performance) and provide information
> like PG version, postgresql.conf, the actual table definition, the
> resulting query plan, etc, etc...
> 	Thanks,
> 		Stephen

hello stephen,

this seems like more a developer question to me than a pre performance one.
it is not related to the table structure at all - it is basically an issue with incredibly large inheritance lists.
it applies to postgres 9 and most likely to everything before.
postgresql.conf is not relevant at all at this point.

the plan is pretty fine.
the question is rather: does anybody see a chance to handle such lists more efficiently inside postgres?
also, it is not the point if my data structure is sane or not. it is really more generic - namely a shortcut for this case inside the planing process.

	many thanks,


Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg StarkDate: 2010-09-03 12:16:25
Subject: Re: Streaming a base backup from master
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2010-09-03 12:04:42
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...

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