| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |
| Date: | 2018-05-03 02:34:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20180503023404.5nfjpwkr72u5hhee@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > I admit I am more concerned about the possibility of bugs than I am
> > about providing a performance-related tool.
>
> I agree that if partition pruning has bugs, somebody might want to
> turn it off. On the other hand, when they do, there's a good chance
> that they will lose so much performance that they'll still be pretty
> sad. Somebody certainly could have a workload where the pruning
> helps, but by a small enough amount that shutting it off is
> acceptable. But I suspect that's a somewhat narrow target.
>
> I'm not going to go to war over this, though. I'm just telling you
> what I think.
Well, we didn't have a GUC initially, evidently because none of us
thought that this would be a huge problem. So maybe you're both right
and it's overkill to have it. I'm not set on having it, either. Does
anybody else have an opinion?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2018-05-03 02:49:42 | Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |
| Previous Message | Yuriy Zhuravlev | 2018-05-03 01:49:43 | Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms |