Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: partitioned table performance
- From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
- To: "Andreas Kostyrka" <andreas(at)kostyrka(dot)org>
- Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: partitioned table performance
- Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:46:43 +0000
On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 22:58 +0100, Andreas Kostyrka wrote: > Am Montag, den 30.10.2006, 08:18 +0000 schrieb Simon Riggs: > > On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 00:28 +0200, Andreas Kostyrka wrote: > > > > > Any ideas how to make the optimizer handle partitioned tables more > > > sensible? > > > > Yes, those are known inefficiencies in the current implementation which > > we expect to address for 8.3. > > Any ideas to force the current optimizer to do something sensible? Brute force & ignorance: PL/pgSQL Perhaps some other domain knowledge might help you shorten the search? Thats all for now. It's not a minor fixup and nobody had time to fix that for 8.2 since other fish were bigger. -- Simon Riggs EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
- References:
- partitioned table performance
- From: Andreas Kostyrka
- Re: partitioned table performance
- From: Simon Riggs
- Re: partitioned table performance
- From: Andreas Kostyrka
- partitioned table performance
- Prev by Date: Re: partitioned table performance
- Next by Date: Index ignored on column containing mostly 0 values
- Previous by thread: Re: partitioned table performance
- Next by thread: Strange plan in pg 8.1.0
- Indexes: