From: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | 'Amit Langote' <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | 'David Rowley' <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: speeding up planning with partitions |
Date: | 2019-02-08 03:41:45 |
Message-ID: | 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FB961EA@G01JPEXMBYT05 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Amit,
From: Amit Langote [mailto:Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp]
> Maybe I chose the the subject line of this thread poorly when I began
> working on it. It should perhaps have been something like "speeding up
> planning of point-lookup queries with many partitions" or something like
> that. There are important use cases beyond point lookup even with
> partitioned tables (or maybe more so with partitioned tables), but perhaps
> unsurprisingly, the bottlenecks in those cases are not *just* in the
> planner.
No, it's simply my fault. I wasn't aware of the CF Bot and the CF entry page that act on the latest submitted patch. I'm relieved to see you have submitted the revised patch.
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-02-08 03:43:15 | Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-02-08 03:35:34 | Re: Fixing findDependentObjects()'s dependency on scan order (regressions in DROP diagnostic messages) |