Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled?

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-05-03T00:44:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I admit I am more concerned about the possibility of bugs than I am
> about providing a performance-related tool.

I agree that if partition pruning has bugs, somebody might want to
turn it off.  On the other hand, when they do, there's a good chance
that they will lose so much performance that they'll still be pretty
sad.  Somebody certainly could have a workload where the pruning
helps, but by a small enough amount that shutting it off is
acceptable.  But I suspect that's a somewhat narrow target.

I'm not going to go to war over this, though.  I'm just telling you
what I think.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


Commits

  1. Tweak partitioning documentation wording

  2. docs: Rework sections on partition pruning/exclusion

  3. Add GUC enable_partition_pruning