Thanks! On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 12:10 AM Justin Pryzby <pry...@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 11:45:53PM -0400, Ronnie S wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > While doing some tests with hash partitioning behavior in PG11 and 12, I > > have found that PG11 is not performing partition pruning with DELETEs > > (explain analyze returned >2000 lines). I then ran the same test in PG12 > > and recreated the objects using the same DDL, and it worked > > > Is this a bug, somewhat related to MergeAppend? > > > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/5220bb7533f9891b1e071da6461d5c387e8f7b09 > > > If it is, anyone know if we have a workaround for DELETEs to use hash > > partitions in PG11? > > I think due to this commit to pg12: > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/22/1778/ > > https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=428b260f87e8861ba8e58807b69d433db491c4f4 > ... > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5c83dbca-12b5-1acf-0e85-58299e464a26%40lab.ntt.co.jp > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4f049572-9440-3c99-afa1-f7ca7f38fe80%40lab.ntt.co.jp > > -- > Justin >
