Re: Planning time of Generic plan for a table partitioned into a lot

On 2018/11/28 13:46, Amit Langote wrote:
> It's cheaper than using a cached generic plan (without re-planning),
> because the latter has to pay the cost of AcquireExecutorLocks which takes
> longer as the number of partitions increases.  Perhaps something to try
> fix fixing too.  Not planning should cost less than planning! :)

Ah, I see that David has already thought about this issue.

(last paragraph of this email)
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKJS1f-ibmyn1W_UsdSmygjKOL6YgPyX0Mz54V_iD0HWWL_h%3Dg%40mail.gmail.com

Thanks,
Amit