Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions
От | Ashutosh Bapat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAExHW5uVT9kNc0+RBs7eg82+vR5Tuyy34yXKegLPqmrSsJ=1Kg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions (Yuya Watari <watari.yuya@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PoC] Reducing planning time when tables have many partitions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 2:22 PM Yuya Watari <watari.yuya@gmail.com> wrote: > > 4. Discussion > > First of all, tables 1, 2 and the figure attached to this email show > that likely and unlikely do not have the effect I expected. Rather, > tables 3, 4, 5 and 6 imply that they can have a negative effect on > queries A and B. So it is better to remove these likely and unlikely. > > For the design change, the benchmark results show that it may cause > some regression, especially for smaller sizes. However, Figure 1 also > shows that the regression is much smaller than its variance. This > design change is intended to improve code maintainability. The > regression is small enough that I think these results are acceptable. > What do you think about this? > > [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJ2pMkZk-Nr=yCKrGfGLu35gK-D179QPyxaqtJMUkO86y1NmSA@mail.gmail.com > [2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJ2pMkYcKHFBD_OMUSVyhYSQU0-j9T6NZ0pL6pwbZsUCohWc7Q@mail.gmail.com > Hi Yuya, For one of the earlier versions, I had reported a large memory consumption in all cases and increase in planning time for Assert enabled builds. How does the latest version perform in those aspects? -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: