Re: why partition pruning doesn't work?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: why partition pruning doesn't work? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 556.1528727192@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: why partition pruning doesn't work? (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: why partition pruning doesn't work?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 11 June 2018 at 10:49, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> * The business with ExecFindInitialMatchingSubPlans remapping the >> subplan indexes seems very dubious to me. Surely, that is adding >> way more complexity and fragility than it's worth. > I think having the ability to prune during executor initialisation is > enormously important. I think without it, this patch is less than half > as useful. Sure. > However, if you didn't mean removing the executor > initialise pruning, and just not remapping the arrays, then I'm not > sure how we'd do that. I'd previously tried having NULL subnodes in > the Append and I thought it required too much hacking work in > explain.c, so I decided to just collapse the array instead and do what > was required to make it work after having removed the unneeded > subplans. Did you have another idea on how to do this? No, that was pretty much exactly what I was envisioning. I have not looked at the consequences for explain.c but it seemed like it couldn't be all that bad; and to my mind the remapping business in the partition code is pretty bad. "It's all in one file" is not a suitable justification for unintelligible, overcomplex code. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: