From: | Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Partition-wise aggregation/grouping |
Date: | 2017-04-05 08:46:51 |
Message-ID: | 14500.1491382011@localhost |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>
> Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Our work will overlap when we are pushing down the aggregate on partitioned
> > base relation to its children/partitions.
> >
> > I think you should continue working on pushing down aggregate onto the
> > joins/scans where as I will continue my work on pushing down aggregates to
> > partitions (joins as well as single table). Once we are done with these task,
> > then we may need to find a way to integrate them.
> >
> > [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAFjFpRfQ8GrQvzp3jA2wnLqrHmaXna-urjm_UY9BqXj=EaDTSA(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com#CAFjFpRfQ8GrQvzp3jA2wnLqrHmaXna-urjm_UY9BqXj=EaDTSA@mail.gmail.com
>
> My patch does also create (partial) aggregation paths below the Append node,
> but only expects SeqScan as input. Please check if you patch can be based on
> this or if there's any conflict.
Well, I haven't imposed any explicit restriction on the kind of path to be
aggregated below the Append path. Maybe the only thing to do is to merge my
patch with the "partition-wise join" patch (which I haven't checked yet).
--
Antonin Houska
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de, http://www.cybertec.at
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2017-04-05 09:03:49 | Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 |
Previous Message | Antonin Houska | 2017-04-05 08:30:57 | Re: Partition-wise aggregation/grouping |