On 2018-Dec-06, Amit Langote wrote:
> The partitionwise join related
> changes in PG 11 moved the add_child_rel_equivalences call in
> set_append_rel_size such that child EC members would be added even before
> checking if the child rel is dummy, but for a reason named in the comment
> above the c
On 2018-Dec-06, Amit Langote wrote:
Hi
> [ Parallel SeqScan on precio_126 to precio_998 ]
>
> > -> Parallel Seq Scan on precio_999 p_874
> > (cost=0.00..27.50 rows=1 width=16)
> >Filter: ((fecha >= '1990-05-06
> > 00:00:00'::timestamp without
Hi,
(Re-sending after adding -hackers, sorry for the noise to those who would
receive this twice)
On 2018/12/05 6:55, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I noticed another interesting thing, which is that if I modify the query
> to actually reference some partition that I do have (as opposed to the
> above,
Hi,
On 2018/12/05 6:55, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I noticed another interesting thing, which is that if I modify the query
> to actually reference some partition that I do have (as opposed to the
> above, which just takes 30s to prune everything) the plan is mighty
> curious ... if only because in o
On 2018/12/06 11:14, Amit Langote wrote:
> I ran the original unmodified query at [1] (the one that produces an empty
> plan due to all children being pruned) against the server built with
> patches I posted on the "speeding up planning with partitions" [2] thread
> and it finished in a jiffy.
For
Hi,
On 2018/12/05 6:55, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Dec-04, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> CREATE TABLE precio(fecha timestamp, pluid int, loccd int, plusalesprice
>> int) PARTITION BY RANGE (fecha);
>> SELECT format('CREATE TABLE public.precio_%s PARTITION OF public.precio
>> (PRIMARY KEY (fe
