Re: why partition pruning doesn't work?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why partition pruning doesn't work?
Date: 2018-06-12 11:47:16
Message-ID: ba0c9a8d-61a8-b50b-6279-535174ac985b@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 06/11/2018 06:41 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 06/11/2018 06:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> If we had any buildfarm critters running valgrind on
>> RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE or CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS builds, they'd have
>> detected use of uninitialized memory here ... but I don't think we have
>> any.  (The combination of valgrind and CCA would probably be too slow to
>> be practical :-(, though maybe somebody with a fast machine could do
>> the other thing.)
>>
>>
>
>
> I don't have a fast machine, but I do have a slow machine already
> running valgrind and not doing much else :-) Let's see how lousyjack
> does with -DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE
>
>

It added about 20% to the run time. That's tolerable, so I'll leave it on.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Darafei Komяpa Praliaskouski 2018-06-12 12:21:38 Re: late binding of shared libs for C functions
Previous Message Andrew Gierth 2018-06-12 11:40:02 Re: BUG #15237: I got "ERROR: source for a multiple-column UPDATE item must be a sub-SELECT or ROW() expression"