From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: documentation fixes for partition pruning, round two |
Date: | 2018-05-24 02:30:40 |
Message-ID: | 4352530c-f050-9666-3a4a-f7f5e3657d04@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Justin.
Thanks for writing the patch. I have a couple of comments.
On 2018/05/24 8:31, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:46:38AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
>> On 24 May 2018 at 09:35, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 08:56:53PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>>>> I reread this and have some more comments.
>>>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/ddl-partitioning.html
>>>
>>>> Let me know if it's useful to provide a patch.
>>>
>>> I propose this.
>>
>> Thanks for working on this.
>>
>> Can you just attach the patch?
>
> Attached.
- behind-the-scenes; however, it is not possible to use some of the
- inheritance features discussed in the previous section with partitioned
- tables and partitions. For example, a partition cannot have any parents
+ behind-the-scenes; however, it is not possible to use some of the generic
+ features of inheritance (discussed below) with declaratively partitioned
+ tables or their partitions For example, a partition cannot have any
parents
As I recall, I had written the "previous section" in the original text to
mean 5.9 Inheritance
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/ddl-inherit.html
Although, we do list some inheritance features that cannot be used with
declarative partitioned tables on the same page in 5.10.3, so what you
have here may be fine.
+ possible to show the difference between a plan whose partitions have been
+ pruned and one whose partitions haven't. A typical unoptimized plan for
+ this type of table setup is:
"a plan whose partitions have been pruned" sounds a bit off; maybe, "a
plan in which partitions have been pruned".
+ controlled ruled by the <literal>enable_partition_pruning</literal>
controlled ruled by -> still controlled by
- pruning uses the table's partitioning constraint, which exists only in
- the case of declarative partitioning.
...
+ pruning uses the table's partitioning bounds, which exists only in
+ the case of declarative partitioning.
Maybe say "partition bounds" here if change it at all.
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-05-24 03:20:28 | Re: Simplify final sync in pg_rewind's target folder and add --no-sync |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-05-24 02:06:52 | Re: Postgres 11 release notes |