| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Imai Yoshikazu <yoshikazu_i443(at)live(dot)jp>, "jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com" <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: speeding up planning with partitions |
| Date: | 2019-03-28 05:03:21 |
| Message-ID: | 19663.1553749401@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> On 2019/03/27 23:57, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, there's something to be said for having plancat.c open each table
>> *and store the Relation pointer in the RelOptInfo*, and then close that
>> again at the end of planning rather than immediately. If we can't avoid
>> these retail table_opens without a great deal of pain, that's the
>> direction I'd tend to go in. However it would add some overhead, in
>> the form of a need to traverse the RelOptInfo array an additional time.
> Just to be sure, do you mean we should do that now or later (David said
> "in the long term")?
It's probably not high priority, though I wonder how much time is being
eaten by the repeated table_opens.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-03-28 05:29:47 | Re: Usage of epoch in txid_current |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-03-28 05:01:35 | Re: jsonpath |