| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Constraint Exclusion on all tables |
| Date: | 2005-07-19 22:50:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20050719225011.GC10127@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:23:49PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Inheritance queries would continue to act as they do now, where an
> excluded table is *not* shown; this is to allow for sensible size
> EXPLAINs when we have 100s of child tables.
Since it's also possible to do partitioning with UNION ALL, maybe it
would be better if there was an option to explain that told it either to
show or not show info about eliminated partitions. That would seem to
serve the general case better than coding it according to table type.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Palle Girgensohn | 2005-07-19 22:54:34 | Re: More buildfarm stuff |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-07-19 21:51:03 | Re: [HACKERS] Patch to fix plpython on OS X |