| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordered Append Node |
| Date: | 2007-11-23 13:11:44 |
| Message-ID: | 4746D190.7070304@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark wrote:
> Ideally we would also be able to do this in the planner. If the planner could
> determine from the constraints that all the key values from each partition are
> non-overlapping and order them properly then it could generate a regular
> append node with a path order without the overhead of the run-time
> comparisons.
>
> But that requires a) dealing with the problem of the parent table which has no
> constraints and ...
It would help even if you could only prove it for some partitions. You
could use a regular append node for the partitions you know not to
overlap, and merge the output of that with the new kind of ordered
append node. We'd see that the parent table is empty on the first
invocation, and after that the ordered append node would just pass
through the tuples.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2007-11-23 13:21:22 | Re: High Availability, Load Balancing, and Replication Feature Matrix |
| Previous Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2007-11-23 13:07:06 | Re: Ordered Append Node |