Re: regression in PG 15.1

From: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: regression in PG 15.1
Date: 2022-11-28 14:57:16
Message-ID: 4B29C00C-028D-43AE-98F8-793BFC461CA5@elevated-dev.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

> On Nov 28, 2022, at 7:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Why do you say this is a regression? From what I know of the partition
> pruning logic (admittedly not a whole lot), I don't think we'd have
> ever pruned on the basis of such a constraint.

Because performance of the query tanked. If it's not a change in table pruning, then it's a change in whether/how/which indexes are used. I guess I'll have to dig into it more and get back to the list--probably tomorrow.

Meantime, thanks for the clue to help guide me here.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-11-28 15:15:50 Re: regression in PG 15.1
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2022-11-28 14:50:08 Re: regression in PG 15.1