Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZUX02sK8jUuoFFK=8DE=vLsXsYDOiDrKDi30X76Ahvug@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> wrote:
> Partitions: test11 FOR VALUES FROM (0) TO (100),
>             test12 FOR VALUES FROM (100) TO (200),
>             test13 FOR VALUES FROM (200) TO (300)
>
> Partitions: test21 FOR VALUES FROM (10) TO (110),
>             test22 FOR VALUES FROM (110) TO (210),
>             test23 FOR VALUES FROM (210) TO (310)
>
> I'm confused, since there is only one-to-one mapping of partitions.

No, test21 would have to be joined to both test11 and test12, since
either could contain matching rows.  Also, test22 would have to be
joined to both test12 and test13.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST VACUUM
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Make foo=null a warning by default.