On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Sure, because you don't have a constraint forbidding the parent from
> having a matching row, no?
As suggested by you, I included a bogus condition in the parent table
which will prevent any row addition in the parent table and made the
constraint NO INHERIT.
i run this
SET constraint_exclusion = on;
explain select * from tstesting.account where account_row_inst = 1001 ;
Append (cost=0.14..8.16 rows=1 width=832)
-> Index Scan using account_part1_pkey on account_part1
(cost=0.14..8.16 rows=1 width=832)
Index Cond: (account_row_inst = 1001)
(3 rows)
The planner shows this for the non partitioned table
Index Scan using account_pkey on account (cost=0.14..8.16 rows=1 width=832)
Index Cond: (account_row_inst = 1001)
(2 rows)
So cost wise they both look same, still when i run the sql in a loop
in large numbers, it takes rougly 1.8 to 2 times more than non
partitioned table.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
