| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, bizgres-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: A Guide to Constraint Exclusion (Partitioning) |
| Date: | 2005-07-23 21:13:01 |
| Message-ID: | 5068.1122153181@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> That was the detail I was missing. I'm surprised because I actually tested
> this before I sent the message and saw a plan like this with a single
> sequential scan node despite the three child tables:
> staging=> explain select * from _test where a=1;
> QUERY PLAN
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Seq Scan on _test (cost=0.00..22.50 rows=5 width=4)
> Filter: (a = 1)
> (2 rows)
Uh, maybe you have sql_inheritance turned off? Every version I can
remember would show you a pretty explicit Append plan for inheritance
scans...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2005-07-23 21:28:01 | Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-07-23 21:06:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Enticing interns to PostgreSQL |