From: | Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, d(dot)ivanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru |
Subject: | Re: Declarative partitioning optimization for large amount of partitions |
Date: | 2017-03-24 15:18:01 |
Message-ID: | 20170324151801.GC16830@e733.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Simon,
> > I don't know which way you're thinking of fixing this, but a planner patch
> > to implement faster partition-pruning will have taken care of this, I
> > think. As you may know, even declarative partitioned tables currently
> > depend on constraint exclusion for partition-pruning and planner's current
> > approach of handling inheritance requires to open all the child tables
> > (partitions), whereas the new approach hopefully shouldn't need to do
> > that. I am not sure if looking for a more localized fix for this would be
> > worthwhile, although I may be wrong.
>
> What "new approach" are we discussing?
> Is there a patch or design discussion?
I think what was meant was plans of my colleague Dmitry Ivanov to
implement partition-pruning. I've just spoke with Dmitry about this
matter. Unless there is anyone else who is already working on this
optimization we would like to work on it together. Unfortunately there
is no patch or design discussion of partition-pruning on this
commitfest.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Steele | 2017-03-24 15:21:09 | Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq |
Previous Message | David Steele | 2017-03-24 15:11:32 | Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines |