Re: Declarative partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: Declarative partitioning
Date
Msg-id 56C28D8A.2060608@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Declarative partitioning  (Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Declarative partitioning
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Josh,

On 2016/02/16 11:41, Josh berkus wrote:
> On 02/15/2016 04:28 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
>> Also, you won't see any optimizer and executor changes. Queries will still
>> use the same plans as existing inheritance-based partitioned tables,
>> although as I mentioned, constraint exclusion won't yet kick in. That will
>> be fixed very shortly.
> 
> We're not going to use CE for the new partitioning long-term, are we? This
> is just the first version, right?

Yes. My approach in previous versions of stuffing major planner changes in
with the syntax patch was not quite proper in retrospect. So, I thought
I'd propose any major planner (and executor) changes later.

Thanks,
Amit





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: innocuous: pgbench does FD_ISSET on invalid socket