|From:||Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|To:||Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: Declarative partitioning optimization for large amount of partitions|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 1 March 2017 at 01:36, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I don't know which way you're thinking of fixing this, but a planner patch
>> to implement faster partition-pruning will have taken care of this, I
>> think. As you may know, even declarative partitioned tables currently
>> depend on constraint exclusion for partition-pruning and planner's current
>> approach of handling inheritance requires to open all the child tables
>> (partitions), whereas the new approach hopefully shouldn't need to do
>> that. I am not sure if looking for a more localized fix for this would be
>> worthwhile, although I may be wrong.
> What "new approach" are we discussing?
> Is there a patch or design discussion?
Neither at the moment. As Aleksander said in his reply I was
referring to Dmitry Ivanov's plan of porting pg_pathman's planner
functionality to core that he mentioned on the declarative
partitioning thread back in December .
|Next Message||Amit Kapila||2017-03-25 05:32:55||Re: Add pgstathashindex() to get hash index table statistics.|
|Previous Message||Michael Paquier||2017-03-25 05:10:35||Re: scram and \password|