From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: slight tweaks to documentation about runtime pruning |
Date: | 2018-12-16 22:30:10 |
Message-ID: | 20181216223010.v6u4sfftb46fcyoe@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-Dec-10, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 20:24, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> > However, for pruned partitions' subplans, what's actually shown is the
> > string "(never executed)", not loops. So, wouldn't it be better to tell
> > the readers to look for that instead of "loops"?
>
> I don't really see any issues with the existing documentation here.
> Remember that pruning can be performed multiple times when a parameter
> changes that was found to match the partition key and the
> Append/MergeAppend is rescanned.
I lean towards Amit's side. I think we're too laconic about many
details of EXPLAIN's output. This is two lines about an interesting
detail that's pretty obscure. It doesn't hurt to have it there.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-12-16 23:08:02 | Re: select limit error in file_fdw |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-12-16 22:25:01 | Re: gist microvacuum doesn't appear to care about hot standby? |