On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Simon Riggs <[email protected]> wrote: > On 21 March 2017 at 13:48, Robert Haas <[email protected]> wrote: >> Don't scan partitioned tables. > > Sounds good. > >> Aside from the obvious advantage of avoiding some work at execution >> time, this has two other advantages. First, it may improve the >> planner's decision-making in some cases since the empty relation >> might throw things off. > > I was surprised to see that an Append node still exists when there is > only one child plan to be appended. I thought removing that was the > whole point of the patch?
No, that was discussed on-thread. http://postgr.es/m/[email protected] It's not a bad idea, but it would require further work on top of what this patch already does. >> Second, it paves the way to getting rid of >> the storage for partitioned tables altogether. > > I thought we already discussed that. Seems strange to mention > something not very important that might happen in the future. We could > save much more space by optimising FSM. Sure, that's possible. I didn't think it was strange to mention it, but you're welcome to have a different opinion. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
