| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mathieu De Zutter <mathieu(at)dezutter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Brad Jorsch <programmer(at)protech1inc(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: UNION ALL and sequential scans |
| Date: | 2009-05-14 15:20:33 |
| Message-ID: | 12329.1242314433@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mathieu De Zutter <mathieu(at)dezutter(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> It's an ancient and fundamental limitation that is fixed in 8.4.
>> Do not expect to see it fixed in 8.3.x.
> Does this also apply to the case of a join on an inherited table ?
> example: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2003-10/msg00018.php
Well, the particular issue described in that message is long gone.
What Brad is complaining about is non-strict expressions in the
outputs of append-relation members. An inheritance tree also forms
an append-relation, but AFAIK there is no way to have anything but
simple Vars in its outputs so the case wouldn't arise. Do you have
a specific problem example in mind?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Carey | 2009-05-14 17:01:02 | Re: AMD Shanghai versus Intel Nehalem |
| Previous Message | Mathieu De Zutter | 2009-05-14 15:10:29 | Re: UNION ALL and sequential scans |