|
Hi Stephen, Constraint exclusion was initially partition and I set it to "on" as suggested and tried that - the query planner in both cases was correctly identifying the specific partitions being queried - the problem seems to be a generic issue related to the way queries on partition tables are handled and how the order by / limit is applied in this scenario. Thanks, Ranga > Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 16:26:23 -0400 > From: sfrost@xxxxxxxxxxx > To: ranga_gopalan@xxxxxxxxxxx > CC: pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Question about partitioned query behavior > > Ranga, > > * Ranga Gopalan (ranga_gopalan@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > It seems that this is an issue faced by others as well - Please see this link: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2236776/efficient-querying-of-multi-partition-postgres-table > > > > Is this a known bug? Is this something that someone is working on or is there a known work around? > > Actually, if you look at that, the problem the original poster had was > that they didn't have constraint_exclusion turned on. Then they were > complaining about having the (empty) master table and the needed > partition included (which, really, shouldn't be that big a deal). > > Did you look at what the other reply suggested? Do you have > constraint_exclusion = 'on' in your postgresql.conf? > > Thanks, > > Stephen The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. Get busy. |
