Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Join optimization for inheritance tables

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Join optimization for inheritance tables
Date: 2009-09-23 00:35:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> As I understand it, partitioning will certainly lead to some significant
> changes/enhancements to the planner. Do you think it is realistic to get
> that for 8.5?

I don't think that waiting for our plans for a more robust partitioning
implementation is a reason to put off improvements to the implementation
we have.  If Simon or Pavel or someone was going all-out on getting the
new partitioning ready, that would be one thing.  But to date, nobody
has volunteered to work on it; we just know we need it.

Of course, that completely leaves aside Tom's critique of the
implementation, which sounds like it needs some work.  Trying to fit the
target table into a range partitioning mold would break with a lot of
real partitionings; for example I have several client DBs which are
partitioned active/inactive-by-date.

What about simply eliminating joins between partitioned tables by
checking which columns' constraints match exactly or are subsets?  A lot
of partitioned DBs partition everything by month, and joining two tables
which were partitioned by month would be useful by itself.

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael PaquierDate: 2009-09-23 02:14:30
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pgbench: new feature allowing to launch shell commands
Previous:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2009-09-23 00:06:58
Subject: Re: Join optimization for inheritance tables

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group