Horton

Re: pgsql: Support partition pruning at execution time

David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2018-04-08T03:42:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On 8 April 2018 at 15:34, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote:
> You can't ever assume that data you just inserted will become
> all-visible just because you just vacuumed the table, unless you know
> that there is NO concurrent activity that might have a snapshot (and no
> other possible reason why OldestXmin might be older than your insert).

Thanks. I got it. It just slipped my slightly paranoid and sleep deprived mind.

I've attached my proposed fix for the unstable regression tests. I
removed the vacuums I'd added in the last version and commented why
we're doing set enable_indesonlyscan = off;

-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Update Append's idea of first_partial_plan

  2. Fix IndexOnlyScan counter for heap fetches in parallel mode

  3. Fix incorrect logic for choosing the next Parallel Append subplan

  4. Minor comment updates

  5. Attempt to stabilize partition_prune test output.

  6. Support partition pruning at execution time