| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |
| Date: | 2018-05-02 23:52:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f8XSqG-QoF_CJxOg9-8Yj3zW5-MbsTEtCTEVNkFW6A0Mg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3 May 2018 at 11:38, David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Maybe "Partition Filtering" (I'm disliking selection, I'm thinking we must
> always select partitions)
I don't see why "Filtering" is any different from pruning, they both
imply removing something that was once there. What I'm saying is, that
it's backward to think of what we have now as pruning, so I don't
think renaming it to "partition filtering" addresses my concern.
FWIW, I'm not set on changing this. I just want to discuss this now so
that the chances of having regrets about this later are reduced.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-05-03 00:03:22 | Re: A few warnings on Windows |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2018-05-02 23:38:53 | Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |