From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> |
Cc: | Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... |
Date: | 2010-10-29 20:23:36 |
Message-ID: | 8406.1288383816@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> writes:
>> Cases with lots of irrelevant indexes. Zoltan's example had 4 indexes
>> per child table, only one of which was relevant to the query. In your
>> test case there are no irrelevant indexes, which is why the runtime
>> didn't change.
> Mmh... I must be doing something wrong. It looks to me it's not just
> the irrelevant indexes: it's the "order by" that counts.
Ah, I oversimplified a bit: actually, if you don't have an ORDER BY or
any mergejoinable join clauses, then the possibly_useful_pathkeys test
in find_usable_indexes figures out that we aren't interested in the sort
ordering of *any* indexes, so the whole thing gets short-circuited.
You need at least the possibility of interest in sorted output from an
indexscan before any of this code runs.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-10-29 20:28:11 | Re: crash in plancache with subtransactions |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-10-29 20:11:18 | Re: [PATCH] Cleanup: Compare pointers to NULL instead of 0 |