Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Partitioned tables and relfilenode
Date: 2017-02-15 16:14:59
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZGtbdJxH947dYC4uQ+PajigN_UCntH0XnXrjtTytA5OQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This is a collection of checks on relkind == RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE
> to avoid interactions with partition tables. Did you consider doing
> something in the executor instead?

That seems inferior, because the planner really ought to know that the
partitioning root doesn't need to be scanned. That way, it can do a
better job getting the cost and selectivity estimates right.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-02-15 16:19:02 Re: CONNECTION LIMIT and Parallel Query don't play well together
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-02-15 16:08:08 Re: [Bug fix] PQsendQuery occurs error when target_session_attrs is set to read-write