| From: | Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Gabriel E(dot) Sánchez Martínez" <gabrielesanchez(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: nested partitioning |
| Date: | 2013-09-18 16:20:06 |
| Message-ID: | 5239D2B6.5060800@optionshouse.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 09/18/2013 11:05 AM, "Gabriel E. Sánchez Martínez" wrote:
> Or would it have to check every child partition, as follows?
>
> #
> Check partition 2000-01-01, 2000-01-02, ... , 2013-09-18. 5010 checks.
> All days but 2012-01-01 are excluded. 5009 partitions excluded with
> 5010 constraint exclusion checks.
My guess based on the fact the planner has no concept of ranges aside
from their width, is that this is the approach it'll likely take. You
can't really teach it that your particular inheritance tree is range
constrained per level, so it has to check every range.
--
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-676-8870
sthomas(at)optionshouse(dot)com
______________________________________________
See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Clodoaldo Neto | 2013-09-18 16:35:20 | pg_upgrade unrecognized configuration parameter “unix_socket_directory” |
| Previous Message | Shaun Thomas | 2013-09-18 16:15:37 | Re: Something Weird Going on with VACUUM ANALYZE |