Re: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ?
Date
Msg-id 1622465.1610676737@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses RE: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ?  (Phil Florent <philflorent@hotmail.com>)
RE: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ?  (Phil Florent <philflorent@hotmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
I wrote:
> There's no specific mechanism in Postgres that would cause "X between 20
> and 10" to be reduced to constant-false

Wait, I take that back.  There is a mechanism that can conclude that
"X >= 20" and "X <= 10" are contradictory, but it's not applied by
default.  Observe:

regression=# set constraint_exclusion = default;
SET
regression=# explain select * from tenk1 where unique1 between 20 and 10;
                                 QUERY PLAN                                  
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Index Scan using tenk1_unique1 on tenk1  (cost=0.29..8.30 rows=1 width=244)
   Index Cond: ((unique1 >= 20) AND (unique1 <= 10))
(2 rows)

regression=# set constraint_exclusion = on;     
SET
regression=# explain select * from tenk1 where unique1 between 20 and 10;
                QUERY PLAN                
------------------------------------------
 Result  (cost=0.00..0.00 rows=0 width=0)
   One-Time Filter: false
(2 rows)

The default value of constraint_exclusion is "partition", which means
(you guessed it) that it's applied only to potential partitioning
constraints.  This is a heuristic based on the typical payoff of
excluding whole partitions versus skipping an empty index scan.
But if you have a workload where it's really worth spending
planner cycles looking for self-contradictory queries, you can
turn it on.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ?
Next
From: Phil Florent
Date:
Subject: RE: Strange (and good) side effect of partitioning ?