Re: Declarative partitioning

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ildar Musin
Тема Re: Declarative partitioning
Дата
Msg-id 56D3715F.1060102@postgrespro.ru
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Declarative partitioning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Ответы Re: Declarative partitioning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Список pgsql-hackers

16/02/16 07:46, Amit Langote wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> On 2016/02/16 11:41, Josh berkus wrote:
>> On 02/15/2016 04:28 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> Also, you won't see any optimizer and executor changes. Queries will still
>>> use the same plans as existing inheritance-based partitioned tables,
>>> although as I mentioned, constraint exclusion won't yet kick in. That will
>>> be fixed very shortly.
>> We're not going to use CE for the new partitioning long-term, are we? This
>> is just the first version, right?
> Yes. My approach in previous versions of stuffing major planner changes in
> with the syntax patch was not quite proper in retrospect. So, I thought
> I'd propose any major planner (and executor) changes later.
>
> Thanks,
> Amit
>
Hello Amit,

Thank you for your work. I'm currently working on extension aimed at 
planner optimization for partitioned tables 
(https://github.com/postgrespro/pg_pathman). At this moment I have an 
implementation of binary search for range partitioned tables with basic 
partitioning keys (date, timestamp, integers etc). And I'd like to try 
to combine your syntax and infrastructure with my binary search 
implementation.
There likely will be changes in range syntax and partitions cache 
structure based on discussion. So looking forward for your next patch.

Ildar



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [REVIEW] In-core regression tests for replication, cascading, archiving, PITR, etc.