Re: Question about partitioned query behavior

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Ranga Gopalan <ranga_gopalan(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question about partitioned query behavior
Date: 2010-07-06 20:26:23
Message-ID: 20100706202623.GM21875@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Ranga,

* Ranga Gopalan (ranga_gopalan(at)hotmail(dot)com) wrote:
> It seems that this is an issue faced by others as well - Please see this link: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2236776/efficient-querying-of-multi-partition-postgres-table
>
> Is this a known bug? Is this something that someone is working on or is there a known work around?

Actually, if you look at that, the problem the original poster had was
that they didn't have constraint_exclusion turned on. Then they were
complaining about having the (empty) master table and the needed
partition included (which, really, shouldn't be that big a deal).

Did you look at what the other reply suggested? Do you have
constraint_exclusion = 'on' in your postgresql.conf?

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ranga Gopalan 2010-07-06 21:02:22 Re: Question about partitioned query behavior
Previous Message Eliot Gable 2010-07-06 20:17:47 Re: Highly Efficient Custom Sorting