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: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...
Date: 2010-10-28 13:49:06
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Actually, I wonder if we could just have a separate canon_pathkeys list 
> for each EquivalenceClass, instead of one big list in PlannerInfo. I'm 
> not too familiar with equivalence classes and all that,

Hm.  I don't like getting rid of the main canon_pathkeys list like that.
The whole point of a canonical pathkey is that there is only one, so
it seems like we need a central list.  But it might be sane for each
EC to have an additional, side list of PKs made from it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-28 14:15:24
Subject: Re: revision of todo: NULL for ROW variables
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-10-28 13:36:57
Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group