| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Kato, Sho" <kato-sho(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Planning time of Generic plan for a table partitioned into a lot |
| Date: | 2018-11-30 07:25:30 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f-n73_rU3Q9fO0-CDg-RLGdwxwecjZb_7zxCbdW0Se_Rw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 20:15, Kato, Sho <kato-sho(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> Will we improve creating the generic plan in the future?
I think Amit's patch will improve the UPDATE/DELETE planning
performance even when nothing can be pruned. Currently planning those
are quite inefficient as a separate grouping planner call is made for
each partition.
> For example, if there is UPDATE / DELETE run-time partition pruning, creating the generic plan will also be faster.
Adding run-time pruning code for that won't make the planner any
faster. There will be a very slight overhead to build the required
PartitionPruneInfo struct to attach to the plan in order to allow the
run-time pruning to work. This would mean that there'd only be a hope
of reducing the execution time of such a plan, not the time to build
the plan in the first place.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-11-30 08:18:09 | Re: Fixes for missing schema qualifications |
| Previous Message | Surafel Temesgen | 2018-11-30 07:23:42 | Re: FETCH FIRST clause PERCENT option |