Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, 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: 2018-05-10 16:58:49
Message-ID: 20180510165849.jvtszi6bbptb2u3f@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David G. Johnston wrote:

> As a user I don't really need to know which model is implemented and the
> name doesn't necessarily imply the implementation. Pruning seems to be the
> commonly-used term for this feature and we should stick with that.

I agree with this conclusion. So we have it right and we shouldn't
change it.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Douglas Doole 2018-05-10 17:05:57 ts_rewrite in 10.4
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2018-05-10 16:50:25 Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled?