pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shaun Thomas <sthomas@optionshouse.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Dave Johansen <davejohansen@gmail.com>
Cc: bricklen <bricklen@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Partitions not Working as Expected
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:14:34 -0500
Message-ID: <51CC8F1A.1090805@optionshouse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <27533.1372358546@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <51CC652F.3010304@optionshouse.com>
	<A76B25F2823E954C9E45E32FA49D70EC1BBD8EEA@mail.corp.perceptron.com>
	<51CC73B6.2050406@optionshouse.com>
	<CAGrpgQ_3pCLt3CJnap3z+nWe3-Q=A3sMH7OKP0sUeo79kViD8w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAcYxUfCaYbpAv-sQaNGKEVK2UZA1BtL87jM8LBd81ZomaLUuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51CC8160.2080905@optionshouse.com>
	<27533.1372358546@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Unsubscribe:  <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>

On 06/27/2013 01:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> That will break things: CURRENT_DATE will then be equivalent to just
> writing today's date as a literal.

Interesting. I tested it by creating a view and a table with a default, 
and it always seems to get translated to:

('now'::text)::date

But I'll take your explanation at face value, since that doesn't imply 
what the output would be. What's interesting is that EnterpriseDB has 
their own pg_catalog.current_date function that gets called by the 
CURRENT_DATE keyword. So unlike in vanilla PG, I could mark just the 
current_date function as immutable without affecting a lot of other 
internals.

On EDB, this actually works:

UPDATE pg_proc
    SET provolatile = 'i'
  WHERE proname = 'current_date';

Then the plan gets pared down as desired. But again, if the date were to 
roll over, I'm not sure what would happen. I wish I could test that 
without fiddling with machine times.

> I don't see any very good solution to your problem within the current
> approach to partitioning, which is basically theorem-proving.  That
> proof engine has no concept of time passing, let alone the sort of
> detailed knowledge of the semantics of this particular function that
> would allow it to conclude "if CURRENT_DATE > '2013-06-20' is true now,
> it will always be so in the future as well".

I get it. From the context of two months ago, CURRENT_DATE > 
'2013-06-20' would return a different answer than it would today, which 
isn't really good for proofs.

The only way for it to work as "expected" would be to add a first pass 
to resolve any immediate variables, which would effectively throw away 
plan caches. I'd actually be OK with that.

> I think most hackers agree that the way forward on partitioning
> involves building hard-wired logic that selects the correct
> partition(s) at run-time, so that it wouldn't particularly matter
> where we got the comparison value from or whether it was a constant.

Fair enough. I'll stop telling devs to use current_date instead of ORM 
injections, then. Hopefully we can track down and tweak the affected 
queries on the tables we're partitioning without too much work and QA.

Thanks, Tom!

-- 
Shaun Thomas
OptionsHouse | 141 W. Jackson Blvd. | Suite 500 | Chicago IL, 60604
312-676-8870
sthomas@optionshouse.com

______________________________________________

See http://www.peak6.com/email_disclaimer/ for terms and conditions related to this email


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance



view thread (16+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <51CC8F1A.1090805@optionshouse.com>
Permalink:  ../51CC8F1A.1090805@optionshouse.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/51CC8F1A.1090805@optionshouse.com

 · 

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: sthomas@optionshouse.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, davejohansen@gmail.com, bricklen@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: Partitions not Working as Expected
  In-Reply-To: <51CC8F1A.1090805@optionshouse.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox