From: "Yuzuko Hosoya" <hosoya.yuzuko@lab.ntt.co.jp>
References: <00e601d4ca86$932b8bc0$b982a340$@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <afef4fb8-c448-d54a-9628-7c26277d4895@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <010e01d4ce68$c0427b10$40c77130$@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <0F97FA9ABBDBE54F91744A9B37151A5129A78A@g01jpexmbkw24>
 <a4968068-6401-7a9c-8bd4-6a3bc9164a86@dalibo.com>
 <001901d4daf5$1ef4f640$5cdee2c0$@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <9bed6b79-f264-6976-b880-e2a5d23e9d85@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <003501d4de21$8816f540$9844dfc0$@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <bd03f475-30d4-c4d0-3d7f-d2fbde755971@dalibo.com>
 <9bb31dfe-b0d0-53f3-3ea6-e64b811424cf@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <c6b9557e-c029-e72c-c697-3f216e559806@dalibo.com>
 <005101d4e074$e24d1e40$a6e75ac0$@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <001ea23e-638f-9ab2-143d-2cf1105bf8d6@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <6213e860-c93b-1934-f5d4-bc3f5999e3af@dalibo.com>
 <fa6ba10b-2123-22b6-8888-e6a3ec84101a@lab.ntt.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <fa6ba10b-2123-22b6-8888-e6a3ec84101a@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Subject: RE: Problem with default partition pruning
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 11:03:05 +0900
Message-ID: <005801d4e2ae$e29e5080$a7daf180$@lab.ntt.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-language: ja
Thread-index: 
 AQLwSThp7L0tC61luGAd4dJt3HxY3QJvrgn9AgtGZCUBpM85VAEOZ04CAeo+SK4CDbFrsgGXrNc6AV8LXc4CAoWeVAJ/vK7zAyoITl4B/o26TwHJkoRXAaGdVJOjCzJkMA==
To: "'Amit Langote'" <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
        "'Thibaut Madelaine'" <thibaut.madelaine@dalibo.com>,
        "'Imai, Yoshikazu'" <imai.yoshikazu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "'PostgreSQL Hackers'" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> On 2019/03/23 2:36, Thibaut Madelaine wrote:
> > I tested your last patch and if I didn't mix up patches on the end =
of
> > a too long week, I get a problem when querying the sub-sub =
partition:
> >
> > test=3D# explain select * from test2_0_10 where id =3D 25;
> >                          QUERY PLAN
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >  Seq Scan on test2_0_10  (cost=3D0.00..25.88 rows=3D6 width=3D36)
> >    Filter: (id =3D 25)
> > (2 rows)
>=20
> The problem here is not really related to partition pruning, but =
another problem I recently sent an
> email about:
>=20
> =
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/9813f079-f16b-61c8-9ab7-4363cab28d8=
0%40lab.ntt.co.jp
>=20
> The problem in this case is that *constraint exclusion* is not =
working, because partition constraint
> is not loaded by the planner.  Note that pruning is only used if a =
query specifies the parent table,
> not a partition.

Thanks for the comments.

I saw that email.  Also, I checked that query Thibaut mentioned worked
correctly with Amit's patch discussed in that thread.


Best regards,
Yuzuko Hosoya