Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC04E9FA48B for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:57:00 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 93483-06 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:56:55 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from heaven.kostyrka.org (h1634.serverkompetenz.net [81.169.154.44]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F3E09F9B05 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:56:55 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by heaven.kostyrka.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF2DF4FB8E; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:56:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from heaven.kostyrka.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (heaven.kostyrka.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32696-05; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:56:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (85-124-82-106.dynamic.xdsl-line.inode.at [85.124.82.106]) by heaven.kostyrka.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D5EA4FB66; Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:56:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: partitioned table performance From: Andreas Kostyrka To: Simon Riggs Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <1162196302.11568.221.camel@silverbirch.site> References: <1162074485.16385.93.camel@andi-lap> <1162196302.11568.221.camel@silverbirch.site> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-y1L6/lYvWKaogX6yC7P6" Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:58:15 +0100 Message-Id: <1162245495.8515.7.camel@andi-lap> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200610/619 X-Sequence-Number: 21748 --=-y1L6/lYvWKaogX6yC7P6 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Montag, den 30.10.2006, 08:18 +0000 schrieb Simon Riggs: > On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 00:28 +0200, Andreas Kostyrka wrote: >=20 > > Any ideas how to make the optimizer handle partitioned tables more > > sensible?=20 >=20 > Yes, those are known inefficiencies in the current implementation which > we expect to address for 8.3. Any ideas to force the current optimizer to do something sensible? Andreas >=20 --=-y1L6/lYvWKaogX6yC7P6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBFRnV3HJdudm4KnO0RAov6AJ4yUGPNIazByKeaX87sWr3ie9q/vgCg2Goq d93Yw1g0DGTfMTe44YZ4ZCE= =jpYi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-y1L6/lYvWKaogX6yC7P6--