| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join |
| Date: | 2018-07-16 15:01:51 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZUX02sK8jUuoFFK=8DE=vLsXsYDOiDrKDi30X76Ahvug@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Partitions: test11 FOR VALUES FROM (0) TO (100),
> test12 FOR VALUES FROM (100) TO (200),
> test13 FOR VALUES FROM (200) TO (300)
>
> Partitions: test21 FOR VALUES FROM (10) TO (110),
> test22 FOR VALUES FROM (110) TO (210),
> test23 FOR VALUES FROM (210) TO (310)
>
> I'm confused, since there is only one-to-one mapping of partitions.
No, test21 would have to be joined to both test11 and test12, since
either could contain matching rows. Also, test22 would have to be
joined to both test12 and test13.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-07-16 15:06:48 | Re: Make foo=null a warning by default. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-07-16 14:58:58 | Re: GiST VACUUM |