Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled?
David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
From: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
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: 2018-05-03T02:49:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday, May 2, 2018, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: > > 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. > > Well, we didn't have a GUC initially, evidently because none of us > thought that this would be a huge problem. So maybe you're both right > and it's overkill to have it. I'm not set on having it, either. Does > anybody else have an opinion? > I toss my +1 to removing it altogether. David J.
Commits
-
Tweak partitioning documentation wording
- 12b9affb32a6 11.0 landed
-
docs: Rework sections on partition pruning/exclusion
- bebc46931a12 11.0 landed
-
Add GUC enable_partition_pruning
- 055fb8d33da6 11.0 landed