Re: slight tweaks to documentation about runtime pruning

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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?