Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?
Date
Msg-id 4964F545.2030802@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> So, barring objections, I'll go make this happen.  What do we want to
> call the intermediate constraint_exclusion value?  The first thing
> that comes to mind is constraint_exclusion = 'child', but perhaps
> someone has a better idea.

This is terrific.  I've actually been turning c_e on and off by ROLE 
property at some sites because of the penalty on one-liner web queries.  This would solve that.

I don't like "child", though, which is not a keyword we use definitively 
elsewhere.  I'd suggest "INHERITED" or something based on "inherit", 
because that's the actual keyword we use when we create a partition.

--Josh


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?