| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: partition tree inspection functions |
| Date: | 2018-10-04 08:18:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20181004081807.GB1256@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 04:53:02PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> As mentioned in my other reply, that might be considered as asking the
> user to know inner details like relkind. Also, if a database has many
> partitioned tables with lots of partitions, the pg_class join might get
> expensive. OTOH, computing and returning it with other fields of
> pg_partition_tree is essentially free.
So it seems that I am clearly outvoted here ;)
Okay, let's do as you folks propose.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yotsunaga, Naoki | 2018-10-04 08:31:12 | RE: [Proposal] Add accumulated statistics for wait event |
| Previous Message | Imai, Yoshikazu | 2018-10-04 08:11:11 | RE: speeding up planning with partitions |