| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... |
| Date: | 2010-09-08 15:26:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20100908152655.GC26232@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Hans-Jürgen Schönig (postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at) wrote:
> but, it seems the problem we are looking is not sufficiently fixed yet.
> in our case we shaved off some 18% of planning time or so - looking at the other top 2 functions i got the feeling that more can be done to reduce this. i guess we have to attack this as well.
An 18% increase is certainly nice, provided it doesn't slow down or
break other things.. I'm looking through the patch now actually and
I'm not really happy with the naming, comments, or some of the code
flow, but I think the concept looks reasonable.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-09-08 15:33:26 | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... |
| Previous Message | Hans-Jürgen Schönig | 2010-09-08 15:09:11 | Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ... |