From: | Michael Lewis <mlewis(at)entrata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | suganthi Sekar <suganthi(at)uniphore(dot)com> |
Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: constraint exclusion with ineq condition (Re: server hardware tuning.) |
Date: | 2019-02-14 14:05:48 |
Message-ID: | CAHOFxGqdAaA_Ryzx22hG-U-dj0c6d55hGj=ythCkYZNLGCpSOQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
What are these two tables partitioned by?
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019, 5:03 AM suganthi Sekar <suganthi(at)uniphore(dot)com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks, i know if explicitly we give in where condition it is working.
>
> i thought with below parameter in Postgresq11 this issue is fixed ?
>
> * enable_partitionwise_join to 'on';*
>
> * what is the use of enable_partitionwise_join to 'on';*
>
> *Thanks for your response.*
>
> *Regards*
> *Suganthi Sekar*
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
> *Sent:* 14 February 2019 16:10:01
> *To:* suganthi Sekar
> *Cc:* pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
> *Subject:* Re: constraint exclusion with ineq condition (Re: server
> hardware tuning.)
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:38:36AM +0000, suganthi Sekar wrote:
> > u mean the below parameter need to set on . its already on only.
> > alter system set constraint_exclusion to 'on';
>
> No, I said:
> > You can work around it by specifying the same condition on
> b.call_created_date:
> > > AND b.call_created_date >='2017-11-01' AND
> b.call_created_date<'2017-11-30'
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | suganthi Sekar | 2019-02-14 14:35:12 | Re: constraint exclusion with ineq condition (Re: server hardware tuning.) |
Previous Message | suganthi Sekar | 2019-02-14 12:41:56 | Re: partition pruning |