On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > Great! And it is very cool that we have basic infrastructure already > committed. Thanks a lot to you and everybody involved.
Thanks. >> of course, maybe you and some of your colleagues >> would like to help review our patches, too. > We understand our reviewing performance is not sufficient. Will try to do > better during next commitfest. Not trying to throw stones, just want to get as much committed as possible. And I think our patches are good and valuable improvements too, so I want to see them go in because they will help everybody. Thanks for trying to increase the reviewing effort; it is sorely needed. >> Do you think this is >> likely to be something where you can get something done quickly, with >> the hope of getting it into v10? > > Yes, because we have set of features already implemented in pg_pathman. In > particular we have following features from your list and some more. > > - more efficient plan-time partition pruning (constraint exclusion is too > slow) > - run-time partition pruning > - insert (and eventually update) tuple routing for foreign partitions > - hash partitioning > - not scanning the parent That's a lot of stuff. Getting even a couple of those would be a big win. >> Time is growing short, but it would >> be great to polish this a little more before we ship it. > > Yes. Getting at least some of this features committed to v10 would be great > and improve partitioning usability a lot. +1. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
