Re: Removing [Merge]Append nodes which contain a single subpath

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Removing [Merge]Append nodes which contain a single subpath
Date: 2017-10-26 20:06:05
Message-ID: 9810.1509048365@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 27 October 2017 at 01:44, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think Antonin has a point. The join processing may deem some base
>> relations dummy (See populate_joinrel_with_paths()). So an Append
>> relation which had multiple child alive at the end of
>> set_append_rel_size() might ultimately have only one child after
>> partition-wise join has worked on it.

TBH, that means partition-wise join planning is broken and needs to be
redesigned. It's impossible that we're going to make sane planning
choices if the sizes of relations change after we've already done some
planning work.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-10-26 20:10:59 Re: [GENERAL] Postgres 10 manual breaks links with anchors
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2017-10-26 19:45:15 Re: performance drop after upgrade (9.6 > 10)