Re: Problem with default partition pruning
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: hosoya.yuzuko@lab.ntt.co.jp
Cc: Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp, thibaut.madelaine@dalibo.com,
imai.yoshikazu@jp.fujitsu.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2019-04-09T01:33:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Sigh.. At Tue, 09 Apr 2019 10:28:48 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote in <20190409.102848.252476604.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> > As the second thought. Partition constraint is not constraint > expression so that's fair to apply partqual ignoring > constraint_exclusion. The variable is set false to skip useless > expression evaluation on all partitions, but partqual should be > evaluated just once. Sorry for my confusion. > > So still it is wrong that the new code is added in > gen_partprune_steps_internal. So still it is wrong that the new code is added at the beginning of the loop on clauses in gen_partprune_steps_internal. > If partqual results true and the > clause is long, the partqual is evaluated uselessly at every > recursion. > > Maybe we should do that when we find that the current clause > doesn't match part attributes. Specifically just after the for > loop "for (i = 0 ; i < part_scheme->partnattrs; i++)". -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
Commits
-
Don't constraint-exclude partitioned tables as much
- 815ef2f568c7 13.0 landed
-
Apply constraint exclusion more generally in partitioning
- 4e85642d935e 13.0 landed
-
Improve pruning of a default partition
- e3967a16d3a0 11.5 landed
- 86544071484a 12.0 landed
- 489247b0e615 13.0 landed
-
Doc: Fix event trigger firing table
- 44460d7017cd 13.0 cited
-
Remove obsolete nbtree insertion comment.
- 489e431ba56b 12.0 cited