Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoY3gV7=GQf3EcfYZ_ZMwvmg2ek8s4LiSk8tWc4_6L+2fw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> I agree.  Equality checks are going to be common enough to warrant them to
> be handled specially, instead of implementing equality-pruning on top of
> min/max framework.

What you might do is pass <btree-strategy-number, bounds> and
optionally allow a second <btree-strategy-number, bounds>.  Then for
the common case of equality you can pass BTEqualStrategyNumber and for
a range bounded at both ends you can pass BTGreaterStrategyNumber or
BTGreaterEqualStrategyNumber for one bound and BTLessStrategyNumber or
BTLessEqualStrategyNumber for the other.

Not sure if this is exactly the right idea but it's what pops to mind.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Daniel Gustafsson
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] generated columns
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Assert that the correct locks are held whencalling PageGetLSN()