Re: 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: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-04-18T01:03:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:07:18PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> > In PG10 the planner's partition pruning could be disabled by changing
> > the constraint_exclusion GUC to off. This is still the case for PG11,
> > but only for UPDATE and DELETE queries. There is currently no way to
> > disable partition pruning for SELECT.
> >
> > Should we allow this?
>
> > 3. No new GUCs / Do nothing.
>
> Maybe this is divergent from the details of the implementation; but, from a
> user's perspective: why not continue to use constraint_exclusion?
>
> I would suggest to add zero new GUCs:
>
> 0. constraint_exclusion={off,partition,on,PLANNER*,EXECUTOR*}
>
My initial reaction is that we need to fix the bug introduced in v10 -
leaving constraint_exclusion working as it has historically and not affect
the new-as-of-10 ability to prune (maybe better termed as skip...)
partitions known during execution to contain no qualified tuples.
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