| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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 |