From: | Niels Jespersen <NJN(at)dst(dot)dk> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vijaykumar Jain <vijaykumarjain(dot)github(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | SV: force partition pruning |
Date: | 2021-05-12 02:46:30 |
Message-ID: | 85050e6bba554ef5b4648b0a72c46baa@dst.dk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Fra: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> Sendt: 12. maj 2021 02:34
>>
>> ok i think i just may be there is very less data , hence no index scan, no pruning.
>>
>> when i try to force seq_scan off,
>>
>
>Unfortunately, no run-time pruning occurred in the above plan.
>
>The fact that the above plan uses Append made that possible.
>
>I think, for now, the only sure way to get run-time pruning working for this case is to run two separate queries so that the 2nd one can
>perform plan-time pruning.
This is the conclusion I'm taking from this thread and will base my further work on. I was the one asking the original question. A table returning function is my work-hypothesis for now.
>
>
>I think if you try to make this work by trying to force the planner's hand, you'll just feel pain when the planner one day has a change of heart and decides to swap the join order on you.
>
>David
>
Thank you for the insights into the planner capabilities.
Regards Niels
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-12 03:42:03 | Re: ERROR: no known snapshots |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2021-05-12 00:34:20 | Re: force partition pruning |