From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights |
Date: | 2019-05-15 02:31:32 |
Message-ID: | eab862c2-033f-56a8-198f-18427f599096@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Hi Jonathan,
Thanks for the updated draft.
On 2019/05/15 11:03, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> Without further ado:
>
> # Feature Highlights
>
> 1. Indexing
>
> - Improvements overall performance to standard (B-tree) indexes with
> writes as well as with bloat
> - REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
> - GiST indexes now support covering indexes (INCLUDE clause)
> - SP-GiST indexes now support K-NN queries
> - WAL overhead reduced on GiST, GIN, & SP-GiST index creation
>
> 2. Partitioning Improvements
>
> - Improved partition pruning, which improves performance on queries over
> tables with thousands of partitions that only need to use a few partitions
> - Improvements to COPY performance and ATTACH PARTITION
> - Allow foreign keys to reference partitioned tables
About the 1st item in "Partitioning Improvements", it's not just partition
pruning that's gotten better. How about writing as:
- Improved performance of processing tables with thousands of partitions
for operations that only need to touch a small number of partitions
Per discussion upthread, that covers improvements to both partition
pruning and tuple routing.
Also, could the title "2. Partitioning Improvements" be trimmed down to
"2. Partitioning", to look like "1. Indexing" for consistency?
Thanks,
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2019-05-15 02:59:48 | Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights |
Previous Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2019-05-15 02:03:16 | Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2019-05-15 02:36:52 | Re: vacuumdb and new VACUUM options |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-05-15 02:17:51 | Re: Inconsistent error message wording for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |