| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: why partition pruning doesn't work? |
| Date: | 2018-06-13 13:47:59 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaQ+hxgDP4uxP_nRgC+JAn33_vona8P+GAnRDkceSZNSw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> As for whether to change it at this point in the release cycle, I
>> guess that, to me, depends on how invasive the fix is.
>
> It seems not to be that bad: we just need a shutdown call for the
> PartitionPruneState, and then we can remember the open relation there.
> The attached is based on David's patch from yesterday.
Seems reasonable. Really, I think we should look for a way to hang
onto the relation at the point where it's originally opened and locked
instead of reopening it here. But that's probably more invasive than
we can really justify right at the moment, and I think this is a step
in a good direction.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2018-06-13 13:57:29 | Re: Partitioning with temp tables is broken |
| Previous Message | Jürgen Strobel | 2018-06-13 13:39:04 | Re: BUG #15212: Default values in partition tables don't work as expected and allow NOT NULL violation |