postgresql/src/test/regress/expected/inherit.out

1831 lines
66 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
--
-- Test inheritance features
--
CREATE TABLE a (aa TEXT);
CREATE TABLE b (bb TEXT) INHERITS (a);
CREATE TABLE c (cc TEXT) INHERITS (a);
CREATE TABLE d (dd TEXT) INHERITS (b,c,a);
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "aa"
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "aa"
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
INSERT INTO a(aa) VALUES('aaa');
INSERT INTO a(aa) VALUES('aaaa');
INSERT INTO a(aa) VALUES('aaaaa');
INSERT INTO a(aa) VALUES('aaaaaa');
INSERT INTO a(aa) VALUES('aaaaaaa');
INSERT INTO a(aa) VALUES('aaaaaaaa');
INSERT INTO b(aa) VALUES('bbb');
INSERT INTO b(aa) VALUES('bbbb');
INSERT INTO b(aa) VALUES('bbbbb');
INSERT INTO b(aa) VALUES('bbbbbb');
INSERT INTO b(aa) VALUES('bbbbbbb');
INSERT INTO b(aa) VALUES('bbbbbbbb');
INSERT INTO c(aa) VALUES('ccc');
INSERT INTO c(aa) VALUES('cccc');
INSERT INTO c(aa) VALUES('ccccc');
INSERT INTO c(aa) VALUES('cccccc');
INSERT INTO c(aa) VALUES('ccccccc');
INSERT INTO c(aa) VALUES('cccccccc');
INSERT INTO d(aa) VALUES('ddd');
INSERT INTO d(aa) VALUES('dddd');
INSERT INTO d(aa) VALUES('ddddd');
INSERT INTO d(aa) VALUES('dddddd');
INSERT INTO d(aa) VALUES('ddddddd');
INSERT INTO d(aa) VALUES('dddddddd');
SELECT relname, a.* FROM a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+----------
a | aaa
a | aaaa
a | aaaaa
a | aaaaaa
a | aaaaaaa
a | aaaaaaaa
b | bbb
b | bbbb
b | bbbbb
b | bbbbbb
b | bbbbbbb
b | bbbbbbbb
c | ccc
c | cccc
c | ccccc
c | cccccc
c | ccccccc
c | cccccccc
d | ddd
d | dddd
d | ddddd
d | dddddd
d | ddddddd
d | dddddddd
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(24 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+----------+----
b | bbb |
b | bbbb |
b | bbbbb |
b | bbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbbb |
d | ddd |
d | dddd |
d | ddddd |
d | dddddd |
d | ddddddd |
d | dddddddd |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----------+----
c | ccc |
c | cccc |
c | ccccc |
c | cccccc |
c | ccccccc |
c | cccccccc |
d | ddd |
d | dddd |
d | ddddd |
d | dddddd |
d | ddddddd |
d | dddddddd |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+----------+----+----+----
d | ddd | | |
d | dddd | | |
d | ddddd | | |
d | dddddd | | |
d | ddddddd | | |
d | dddddddd | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, a.* FROM ONLY a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+----------
a | aaa
a | aaaa
a | aaaaa
a | aaaaaa
a | aaaaaaa
a | aaaaaaaa
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM ONLY b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+----------+----
b | bbb |
b | bbbb |
b | bbbbb |
b | bbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbbb |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM ONLY c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----------+----
c | ccc |
c | cccc |
c | ccccc |
c | cccccc |
c | ccccccc |
c | cccccccc |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM ONLY d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+----------+----+----+----
d | ddd | | |
d | dddd | | |
d | ddddd | | |
d | dddddd | | |
d | ddddddd | | |
d | dddddddd | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
UPDATE a SET aa='zzzz' WHERE aa='aaaa';
UPDATE ONLY a SET aa='zzzzz' WHERE aa='aaaaa';
UPDATE b SET aa='zzz' WHERE aa='aaa';
UPDATE ONLY b SET aa='zzz' WHERE aa='aaa';
UPDATE a SET aa='zzzzzz' WHERE aa LIKE 'aaa%';
SELECT relname, a.* FROM a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+----------
a | zzzz
a | zzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
b | bbb
b | bbbb
b | bbbbb
b | bbbbbb
b | bbbbbbb
b | bbbbbbbb
c | ccc
c | cccc
c | ccccc
c | cccccc
c | ccccccc
c | cccccccc
d | ddd
d | dddd
d | ddddd
d | dddddd
d | ddddddd
d | dddddddd
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(24 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+----------+----
b | bbb |
b | bbbb |
b | bbbbb |
b | bbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbbb |
d | ddd |
d | dddd |
d | ddddd |
d | dddddd |
d | ddddddd |
d | dddddddd |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----------+----
c | ccc |
c | cccc |
c | ccccc |
c | cccccc |
c | ccccccc |
c | cccccccc |
d | ddd |
d | dddd |
d | ddddd |
d | dddddd |
d | ddddddd |
d | dddddddd |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+----------+----+----+----
d | ddd | | |
d | dddd | | |
d | ddddd | | |
d | dddddd | | |
d | ddddddd | | |
d | dddddddd | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, a.* FROM ONLY a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+--------
a | zzzz
a | zzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM ONLY b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+----------+----
b | bbb |
b | bbbb |
b | bbbbb |
b | bbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbb |
b | bbbbbbbb |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM ONLY c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----------+----
c | ccc |
c | cccc |
c | ccccc |
c | cccccc |
c | ccccccc |
c | cccccccc |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM ONLY d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+----------+----+----+----
d | ddd | | |
d | dddd | | |
d | ddddd | | |
d | dddddd | | |
d | ddddddd | | |
d | dddddddd | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
UPDATE b SET aa='new';
SELECT relname, a.* FROM a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+----------
a | zzzz
a | zzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
b | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
c | ccc
c | cccc
c | ccccc
c | cccccc
c | ccccccc
c | cccccccc
d | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(24 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+-----+----
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----------+----
c | ccc |
c | cccc |
c | ccccc |
c | cccccc |
c | ccccccc |
c | cccccccc |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+-----+----+----+----
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, a.* FROM ONLY a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+--------
a | zzzz
a | zzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
a | zzzzzz
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM ONLY b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+-----+----
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM ONLY c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----------+----
c | ccc |
c | cccc |
c | ccccc |
c | cccccc |
c | ccccccc |
c | cccccccc |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM ONLY d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+-----+----+----+----
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
UPDATE a SET aa='new';
DELETE FROM ONLY c WHERE aa='new';
SELECT relname, a.* FROM a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+-----
a | new
a | new
a | new
a | new
a | new
a | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
b | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
d | new
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(18 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+-----+----
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(12 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+-----+----
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
d | new |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+-----+----+----+----
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, a.* FROM ONLY a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+-----
a | new
a | new
a | new
a | new
a | new
a | new
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM ONLY b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+-----+----
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
b | new |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM ONLY c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM ONLY d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+-----+----+----+----
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
d | new | | |
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(6 rows)
DELETE FROM a;
SELECT relname, a.* FROM a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+----+----+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, a.* FROM ONLY a, pg_class where a.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa
---------+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, b.* FROM ONLY b, pg_class where b.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb
---------+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, c.* FROM ONLY c, pg_class where c.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | cc
---------+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
SELECT relname, d.* FROM ONLY d, pg_class where d.tableoid = pg_class.oid;
relname | aa | bb | cc | dd
---------+----+----+----+----
2000-06-09 13:12:38 +02:00
(0 rows)
-- Confirm PRIMARY KEY adds NOT NULL constraint to child table
CREATE TEMP TABLE z (b TEXT, PRIMARY KEY(aa, b)) inherits (a);
INSERT INTO z VALUES (NULL, 'text'); -- should fail
ERROR: null value in column "aa" violates not-null constraint
DETAIL: Failing row contains (null, text).
-- Check UPDATE with inherited target and an inherited source table
create temp table foo(f1 int, f2 int);
create temp table foo2(f3 int) inherits (foo);
create temp table bar(f1 int, f2 int);
create temp table bar2(f3 int) inherits (bar);
insert into foo values(1,1);
insert into foo values(3,3);
insert into foo2 values(2,2,2);
insert into foo2 values(3,3,3);
insert into bar values(1,1);
insert into bar values(2,2);
insert into bar values(3,3);
insert into bar values(4,4);
insert into bar2 values(1,1,1);
insert into bar2 values(2,2,2);
insert into bar2 values(3,3,3);
insert into bar2 values(4,4,4);
update bar set f2 = f2 + 100 where f1 in (select f1 from foo);
select tableoid::regclass::text as relname, bar.* from bar order by 1,2;
relname | f1 | f2
---------+----+-----
bar | 1 | 101
bar | 2 | 102
bar | 3 | 103
bar | 4 | 4
bar2 | 1 | 101
bar2 | 2 | 102
bar2 | 3 | 103
bar2 | 4 | 4
(8 rows)
-- Check UPDATE with inherited target and an appendrel subquery
update bar set f2 = f2 + 100
from
( select f1 from foo union all select f1+3 from foo ) ss
where bar.f1 = ss.f1;
select tableoid::regclass::text as relname, bar.* from bar order by 1,2;
relname | f1 | f2
---------+----+-----
bar | 1 | 201
bar | 2 | 202
bar | 3 | 203
bar | 4 | 104
bar2 | 1 | 201
bar2 | 2 | 202
bar2 | 3 | 203
bar2 | 4 | 104
(8 rows)
-- Check UPDATE with *partitioned* inherited target and an appendrel subquery
create table some_tab (a int);
insert into some_tab values (0);
create table some_tab_child () inherits (some_tab);
insert into some_tab_child values (1);
create table parted_tab (a int, b char) partition by list (a);
create table parted_tab_part1 partition of parted_tab for values in (1);
create table parted_tab_part2 partition of parted_tab for values in (2);
create table parted_tab_part3 partition of parted_tab for values in (3);
insert into parted_tab values (1, 'a'), (2, 'a'), (3, 'a');
update parted_tab set b = 'b'
from
(select a from some_tab union all select a+1 from some_tab) ss (a)
where parted_tab.a = ss.a;
select tableoid::regclass::text as relname, parted_tab.* from parted_tab order by 1,2;
relname | a | b
------------------+---+---
parted_tab_part1 | 1 | b
parted_tab_part2 | 2 | b
parted_tab_part3 | 3 | a
(3 rows)
truncate parted_tab;
insert into parted_tab values (1, 'a'), (2, 'a'), (3, 'a');
update parted_tab set b = 'b'
from
(select 0 from parted_tab union all select 1 from parted_tab) ss (a)
where parted_tab.a = ss.a;
select tableoid::regclass::text as relname, parted_tab.* from parted_tab order by 1,2;
relname | a | b
------------------+---+---
parted_tab_part1 | 1 | b
parted_tab_part2 | 2 | a
parted_tab_part3 | 3 | a
(3 rows)
drop table parted_tab;
drop table some_tab cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to table some_tab_child
/* Test multiple inheritance of column defaults */
CREATE TABLE firstparent (tomorrow date default now()::date + 1);
CREATE TABLE secondparent (tomorrow date default now() :: date + 1);
CREATE TABLE jointchild () INHERITS (firstparent, secondparent); -- ok
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "tomorrow"
CREATE TABLE thirdparent (tomorrow date default now()::date - 1);
CREATE TABLE otherchild () INHERITS (firstparent, thirdparent); -- not ok
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "tomorrow"
ERROR: column "tomorrow" inherits conflicting default values
HINT: To resolve the conflict, specify a default explicitly.
CREATE TABLE otherchild (tomorrow date default now())
INHERITS (firstparent, thirdparent); -- ok, child resolves ambiguous default
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "tomorrow"
NOTICE: merging column "tomorrow" with inherited definition
DROP TABLE firstparent, secondparent, jointchild, thirdparent, otherchild;
-- Test changing the type of inherited columns
insert into d values('test','one','two','three');
alter table a alter column aa type integer using bit_length(aa);
select * from d;
aa | bb | cc | dd
----+-----+-----+-------
32 | one | two | three
(1 row)
-- check that oid column is handled properly during alter table inherit
create table oid_parent (a int) with oids;
create table oid_child () inherits (oid_parent);
select attinhcount, attislocal from pg_attribute
where attrelid = 'oid_child'::regclass and attname = 'oid';
attinhcount | attislocal
-------------+------------
1 | f
(1 row)
drop table oid_child;
create table oid_child (a int) without oids;
alter table oid_child inherit oid_parent; -- fail
ERROR: table "oid_child" without OIDs cannot inherit from table "oid_parent" with OIDs
alter table oid_child set with oids;
select attinhcount, attislocal from pg_attribute
where attrelid = 'oid_child'::regclass and attname = 'oid';
attinhcount | attislocal
-------------+------------
0 | t
(1 row)
alter table oid_child inherit oid_parent;
select attinhcount, attislocal from pg_attribute
where attrelid = 'oid_child'::regclass and attname = 'oid';
attinhcount | attislocal
-------------+------------
1 | t
(1 row)
alter table oid_child set without oids; -- fail
ERROR: cannot drop inherited column "oid"
alter table oid_parent set without oids;
select attinhcount, attislocal from pg_attribute
where attrelid = 'oid_child'::regclass and attname = 'oid';
attinhcount | attislocal
-------------+------------
0 | t
(1 row)
alter table oid_child set without oids;
select attinhcount, attislocal from pg_attribute
where attrelid = 'oid_child'::regclass and attname = 'oid';
attinhcount | attislocal
-------------+------------
(0 rows)
drop table oid_parent cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to table oid_child
-- Test non-inheritable parent constraints
create table p1(ff1 int);
alter table p1 add constraint p1chk check (ff1 > 0) no inherit;
alter table p1 add constraint p2chk check (ff1 > 10);
-- connoinherit should be true for NO INHERIT constraint
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.connoinherit from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname = 'p1' order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | connoinherit
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+--------------
p1 | p1chk | c | t | 0 | t
p1 | p2chk | c | t | 0 | f
(2 rows)
-- Test that child does not inherit NO INHERIT constraints
create table c1 () inherits (p1);
\d p1
Table "public.p1"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
ff1 | integer | | |
Check constraints:
"p1chk" CHECK (ff1 > 0) NO INHERIT
"p2chk" CHECK (ff1 > 10)
Number of child tables: 1 (Use \d+ to list them.)
\d c1
Table "public.c1"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
ff1 | integer | | |
Check constraints:
"p2chk" CHECK (ff1 > 10)
Inherits: p1
-- Test that child does not override inheritable constraints of the parent
create table c2 (constraint p2chk check (ff1 > 10) no inherit) inherits (p1); --fails
ERROR: constraint "p2chk" conflicts with inherited constraint on relation "c2"
drop table p1 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to table c1
-- Tests for casting between the rowtypes of parent and child
-- tables. See the pgsql-hackers thread beginning Dec. 4/04
create table base (i integer);
create table derived () inherits (base);
insert into derived (i) values (0);
select derived::base from derived;
derived
---------
(0)
(1 row)
select NULL::derived::base;
base
------
(1 row)
drop table derived;
drop table base;
create table p1(ff1 int);
create table p2(f1 text);
create function p2text(p2) returns text as 'select $1.f1' language sql;
create table c1(f3 int) inherits(p1,p2);
insert into c1 values(123456789, 'hi', 42);
select p2text(c1.*) from c1;
p2text
--------
hi
(1 row)
drop function p2text(p2);
drop table c1;
drop table p2;
drop table p1;
CREATE TABLE ac (aa TEXT);
alter table ac add constraint ac_check check (aa is not null);
CREATE TABLE bc (bb TEXT) INHERITS (ac);
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+----------+---------+------------+-------------+------------------
ac | ac_check | c | t | 0 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
bc | ac_check | c | f | 1 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
(2 rows)
insert into ac (aa) values (NULL);
ERROR: new row for relation "ac" violates check constraint "ac_check"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (null).
insert into bc (aa) values (NULL);
ERROR: new row for relation "bc" violates check constraint "ac_check"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (null, null).
alter table bc drop constraint ac_check; -- fail, disallowed
ERROR: cannot drop inherited constraint "ac_check" of relation "bc"
alter table ac drop constraint ac_check;
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+--------
(0 rows)
-- try the unnamed-constraint case
alter table ac add check (aa is not null);
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+-------------+---------+------------+-------------+------------------
ac | ac_aa_check | c | t | 0 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
bc | ac_aa_check | c | f | 1 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
(2 rows)
insert into ac (aa) values (NULL);
ERROR: new row for relation "ac" violates check constraint "ac_aa_check"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (null).
insert into bc (aa) values (NULL);
ERROR: new row for relation "bc" violates check constraint "ac_aa_check"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (null, null).
alter table bc drop constraint ac_aa_check; -- fail, disallowed
ERROR: cannot drop inherited constraint "ac_aa_check" of relation "bc"
alter table ac drop constraint ac_aa_check;
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+--------
(0 rows)
alter table ac add constraint ac_check check (aa is not null);
alter table bc no inherit ac;
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+----------+---------+------------+-------------+------------------
ac | ac_check | c | t | 0 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
bc | ac_check | c | t | 0 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
(2 rows)
alter table bc drop constraint ac_check;
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+----------+---------+------------+-------------+------------------
ac | ac_check | c | t | 0 | (aa IS NOT NULL)
(1 row)
alter table ac drop constraint ac_check;
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+--------
(0 rows)
drop table bc;
drop table ac;
create table ac (a int constraint check_a check (a <> 0));
create table bc (a int constraint check_a check (a <> 0), b int constraint check_b check (b <> 0)) inherits (ac);
NOTICE: merging column "a" with inherited definition
NOTICE: merging constraint "check_a" with inherited definition
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+----------
ac | check_a | c | t | 0 | (a <> 0)
bc | check_a | c | t | 1 | (a <> 0)
bc | check_b | c | t | 0 | (b <> 0)
(3 rows)
drop table bc;
drop table ac;
create table ac (a int constraint check_a check (a <> 0));
create table bc (b int constraint check_b check (b <> 0));
create table cc (c int constraint check_c check (c <> 0)) inherits (ac, bc);
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc', 'cc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+----------
ac | check_a | c | t | 0 | (a <> 0)
bc | check_b | c | t | 0 | (b <> 0)
cc | check_a | c | f | 1 | (a <> 0)
cc | check_b | c | f | 1 | (b <> 0)
cc | check_c | c | t | 0 | (c <> 0)
(5 rows)
alter table cc no inherit bc;
select pc.relname, pgc.conname, pgc.contype, pgc.conislocal, pgc.coninhcount, pgc.consrc from pg_class as pc inner join pg_constraint as pgc on (pgc.conrelid = pc.oid) where pc.relname in ('ac', 'bc', 'cc') order by 1,2;
relname | conname | contype | conislocal | coninhcount | consrc
---------+---------+---------+------------+-------------+----------
ac | check_a | c | t | 0 | (a <> 0)
bc | check_b | c | t | 0 | (b <> 0)
cc | check_a | c | f | 1 | (a <> 0)
cc | check_b | c | t | 0 | (b <> 0)
cc | check_c | c | t | 0 | (c <> 0)
(5 rows)
drop table cc;
drop table bc;
drop table ac;
create table p1(f1 int);
create table p2(f2 int);
create table c1(f3 int) inherits(p1,p2);
insert into c1 values(1,-1,2);
alter table p2 add constraint cc check (f2>0); -- fail
ERROR: check constraint "cc" is violated by some row
alter table p2 add check (f2>0); -- check it without a name, too
ERROR: check constraint "p2_f2_check" is violated by some row
delete from c1;
insert into c1 values(1,1,2);
alter table p2 add check (f2>0);
insert into c1 values(1,-1,2); -- fail
ERROR: new row for relation "c1" violates check constraint "p2_f2_check"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (1, -1, 2).
create table c2(f3 int) inherits(p1,p2);
\d c2
Table "public.c2"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
f1 | integer | | |
f2 | integer | | |
f3 | integer | | |
Check constraints:
"p2_f2_check" CHECK (f2 > 0)
Inherits: p1,
p2
create table c3 (f4 int) inherits(c1,c2);
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "f1"
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "f2"
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "f3"
\d c3
Table "public.c3"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
f1 | integer | | |
f2 | integer | | |
f3 | integer | | |
f4 | integer | | |
Check constraints:
"p2_f2_check" CHECK (f2 > 0)
Inherits: c1,
c2
drop table p1 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to 3 other objects
DETAIL: drop cascades to table c1
drop cascades to table c2
drop cascades to table c3
drop table p2 cascade;
create table pp1 (f1 int);
create table cc1 (f2 text, f3 int) inherits (pp1);
alter table pp1 add column a1 int check (a1 > 0);
\d cc1
Table "public.cc1"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
f1 | integer | | |
f2 | text | | |
f3 | integer | | |
a1 | integer | | |
Check constraints:
"pp1_a1_check" CHECK (a1 > 0)
Inherits: pp1
create table cc2(f4 float) inherits(pp1,cc1);
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "f1"
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "a1"
\d cc2
Table "public.cc2"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+------------------+-----------+----------+---------
f1 | integer | | |
a1 | integer | | |
f2 | text | | |
f3 | integer | | |
f4 | double precision | | |
Check constraints:
"pp1_a1_check" CHECK (a1 > 0)
Inherits: pp1,
cc1
alter table pp1 add column a2 int check (a2 > 0);
NOTICE: merging definition of column "a2" for child "cc2"
NOTICE: merging constraint "pp1_a2_check" with inherited definition
\d cc2
Table "public.cc2"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+------------------+-----------+----------+---------
f1 | integer | | |
a1 | integer | | |
f2 | text | | |
f3 | integer | | |
f4 | double precision | | |
a2 | integer | | |
Check constraints:
"pp1_a1_check" CHECK (a1 > 0)
"pp1_a2_check" CHECK (a2 > 0)
Inherits: pp1,
cc1
drop table pp1 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to 2 other objects
DETAIL: drop cascades to table cc1
drop cascades to table cc2
-- Test for renaming in simple multiple inheritance
CREATE TABLE inht1 (a int, b int);
CREATE TABLE inhs1 (b int, c int);
CREATE TABLE inhts (d int) INHERITS (inht1, inhs1);
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "b"
ALTER TABLE inht1 RENAME a TO aa;
ALTER TABLE inht1 RENAME b TO bb; -- to be failed
ERROR: cannot rename inherited column "b"
ALTER TABLE inhts RENAME aa TO aaa; -- to be failed
ERROR: cannot rename inherited column "aa"
ALTER TABLE inhts RENAME d TO dd;
\d+ inhts
Table "public.inhts"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
aa | integer | | | | plain | |
b | integer | | | | plain | |
c | integer | | | | plain | |
dd | integer | | | | plain | |
Inherits: inht1,
inhs1
DROP TABLE inhts;
-- Test for renaming in diamond inheritance
CREATE TABLE inht2 (x int) INHERITS (inht1);
CREATE TABLE inht3 (y int) INHERITS (inht1);
CREATE TABLE inht4 (z int) INHERITS (inht2, inht3);
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "aa"
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "b"
ALTER TABLE inht1 RENAME aa TO aaa;
\d+ inht4
Table "public.inht4"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
aaa | integer | | | | plain | |
b | integer | | | | plain | |
x | integer | | | | plain | |
y | integer | | | | plain | |
z | integer | | | | plain | |
Inherits: inht2,
inht3
CREATE TABLE inhts (d int) INHERITS (inht2, inhs1);
NOTICE: merging multiple inherited definitions of column "b"
ALTER TABLE inht1 RENAME aaa TO aaaa;
ALTER TABLE inht1 RENAME b TO bb; -- to be failed
ERROR: cannot rename inherited column "b"
\d+ inhts
Table "public.inhts"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
aaaa | integer | | | | plain | |
b | integer | | | | plain | |
x | integer | | | | plain | |
c | integer | | | | plain | |
d | integer | | | | plain | |
Inherits: inht2,
inhs1
WITH RECURSIVE r AS (
SELECT 'inht1'::regclass AS inhrelid
UNION ALL
SELECT c.inhrelid FROM pg_inherits c, r WHERE r.inhrelid = c.inhparent
)
SELECT a.attrelid::regclass, a.attname, a.attinhcount, e.expected
FROM (SELECT inhrelid, count(*) AS expected FROM pg_inherits
WHERE inhparent IN (SELECT inhrelid FROM r) GROUP BY inhrelid) e
JOIN pg_attribute a ON e.inhrelid = a.attrelid WHERE NOT attislocal
ORDER BY a.attrelid::regclass::name, a.attnum;
attrelid | attname | attinhcount | expected
----------+---------+-------------+----------
inht2 | aaaa | 1 | 1
inht2 | b | 1 | 1
inht3 | aaaa | 1 | 1
inht3 | b | 1 | 1
inht4 | aaaa | 2 | 2
inht4 | b | 2 | 2
inht4 | x | 1 | 2
inht4 | y | 1 | 2
inhts | aaaa | 1 | 1
inhts | b | 2 | 1
inhts | x | 1 | 1
inhts | c | 1 | 1
(12 rows)
DROP TABLE inht1, inhs1 CASCADE;
NOTICE: drop cascades to 4 other objects
DETAIL: drop cascades to table inht2
drop cascades to table inhts
drop cascades to table inht3
drop cascades to table inht4
2016-03-15 23:06:11 +01:00
-- Test non-inheritable indices [UNIQUE, EXCLUDE] constraints
CREATE TABLE test_constraints (id int, val1 varchar, val2 int, UNIQUE(val1, val2));
CREATE TABLE test_constraints_inh () INHERITS (test_constraints);
\d+ test_constraints
Table "public.test_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+-------------------+-----------+----------+---------+----------+--------------+-------------
id | integer | | | | plain | |
val1 | character varying | | | | extended | |
val2 | integer | | | | plain | |
Indexes:
"test_constraints_val1_val2_key" UNIQUE CONSTRAINT, btree (val1, val2)
Child tables: test_constraints_inh
ALTER TABLE ONLY test_constraints DROP CONSTRAINT test_constraints_val1_val2_key;
\d+ test_constraints
Table "public.test_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+-------------------+-----------+----------+---------+----------+--------------+-------------
id | integer | | | | plain | |
val1 | character varying | | | | extended | |
val2 | integer | | | | plain | |
Child tables: test_constraints_inh
\d+ test_constraints_inh
Table "public.test_constraints_inh"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+-------------------+-----------+----------+---------+----------+--------------+-------------
id | integer | | | | plain | |
val1 | character varying | | | | extended | |
val2 | integer | | | | plain | |
Inherits: test_constraints
DROP TABLE test_constraints_inh;
DROP TABLE test_constraints;
CREATE TABLE test_ex_constraints (
c circle,
EXCLUDE USING gist (c WITH &&)
);
CREATE TABLE test_ex_constraints_inh () INHERITS (test_ex_constraints);
\d+ test_ex_constraints
Table "public.test_ex_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+--------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
c | circle | | | | plain | |
Indexes:
"test_ex_constraints_c_excl" EXCLUDE USING gist (c WITH &&)
Child tables: test_ex_constraints_inh
ALTER TABLE test_ex_constraints DROP CONSTRAINT test_ex_constraints_c_excl;
\d+ test_ex_constraints
Table "public.test_ex_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+--------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
c | circle | | | | plain | |
Child tables: test_ex_constraints_inh
\d+ test_ex_constraints_inh
Table "public.test_ex_constraints_inh"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+--------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
c | circle | | | | plain | |
Inherits: test_ex_constraints
DROP TABLE test_ex_constraints_inh;
DROP TABLE test_ex_constraints;
2016-03-15 23:06:11 +01:00
-- Test non-inheritable foreign key constraints
CREATE TABLE test_primary_constraints(id int PRIMARY KEY);
CREATE TABLE test_foreign_constraints(id1 int REFERENCES test_primary_constraints(id));
CREATE TABLE test_foreign_constraints_inh () INHERITS (test_foreign_constraints);
\d+ test_primary_constraints
Table "public.test_primary_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
id | integer | | not null | | plain | |
Indexes:
"test_primary_constraints_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (id)
Referenced by:
TABLE "test_foreign_constraints" CONSTRAINT "test_foreign_constraints_id1_fkey" FOREIGN KEY (id1) REFERENCES test_primary_constraints(id)
\d+ test_foreign_constraints
Table "public.test_foreign_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
id1 | integer | | | | plain | |
Foreign-key constraints:
"test_foreign_constraints_id1_fkey" FOREIGN KEY (id1) REFERENCES test_primary_constraints(id)
Child tables: test_foreign_constraints_inh
ALTER TABLE test_foreign_constraints DROP CONSTRAINT test_foreign_constraints_id1_fkey;
\d+ test_foreign_constraints
Table "public.test_foreign_constraints"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
id1 | integer | | | | plain | |
Child tables: test_foreign_constraints_inh
\d+ test_foreign_constraints_inh
Table "public.test_foreign_constraints_inh"
Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
id1 | integer | | | | plain | |
Inherits: test_foreign_constraints
DROP TABLE test_foreign_constraints_inh;
DROP TABLE test_foreign_constraints;
DROP TABLE test_primary_constraints;
Fix two bugs in merging of inherited CHECK constraints. Historically, we've allowed users to add a CHECK constraint to a child table and then add an identical CHECK constraint to the parent. This results in "merging" the two constraints so that the pre-existing child constraint ends up with both conislocal = true and coninhcount > 0. However, if you tried to do it in the other order, you got a duplicate constraint error. This is problematic for pg_dump, which needs to issue separated ADD CONSTRAINT commands in some cases, but has no good way to ensure that the constraints will be added in the required order. And it's more than a bit arbitrary, too. The goal of complaining about duplicated ADD CONSTRAINT commands can be served if we reject the case of adding a constraint when the existing one already has conislocal = true; but if it has conislocal = false, let's just make the ADD CONSTRAINT set conislocal = true. In this way, either order of adding the constraints has the same end result. Another problem was that the code allowed creation of a parent constraint marked convalidated that is merged with a child constraint that is !convalidated. In this case, an inheritance scan of the parent table could emit some rows violating the constraint condition, which would be an unexpected result given the marking of the parent constraint as validated. Hence, forbid merging of constraints in this case. (Note: valid child and not-valid parent seems fine, so continue to allow that.) Per report from Benedikt Grundmann. Back-patch to 9.2 where we introduced possibly-not-valid check constraints. The second bug obviously doesn't apply before that, and I think the first doesn't either, because pg_dump only gets into this situation when dealing with not-valid constraints. Report: <CADbMkNPT-Jz5PRSQ4RbUASYAjocV_KHUWapR%2Bg8fNvhUAyRpxA%40mail.gmail.com> Discussion: <22108.1475874586@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2016-10-09 01:29:27 +02:00
-- Test that parent and child CHECK constraints can be created in either order
create table p1(f1 int);
create table p1_c1() inherits(p1);
alter table p1 add constraint inh_check_constraint1 check (f1 > 0);
alter table p1_c1 add constraint inh_check_constraint1 check (f1 > 0);
NOTICE: merging constraint "inh_check_constraint1" with inherited definition
alter table p1_c1 add constraint inh_check_constraint2 check (f1 < 10);
alter table p1 add constraint inh_check_constraint2 check (f1 < 10);
NOTICE: merging constraint "inh_check_constraint2" with inherited definition
select conrelid::regclass::text as relname, conname, conislocal, coninhcount
from pg_constraint where conname like 'inh\_check\_constraint%'
order by 1, 2;
relname | conname | conislocal | coninhcount
---------+-----------------------+------------+-------------
p1 | inh_check_constraint1 | t | 0
p1 | inh_check_constraint2 | t | 0
p1_c1 | inh_check_constraint1 | t | 1
p1_c1 | inh_check_constraint2 | t | 1
(4 rows)
drop table p1 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to table p1_c1
-- Test that a valid child can have not-valid parent, but not vice versa
create table invalid_check_con(f1 int);
create table invalid_check_con_child() inherits(invalid_check_con);
alter table invalid_check_con_child add constraint inh_check_constraint check(f1 > 0) not valid;
alter table invalid_check_con add constraint inh_check_constraint check(f1 > 0); -- fail
ERROR: constraint "inh_check_constraint" conflicts with NOT VALID constraint on relation "invalid_check_con_child"
alter table invalid_check_con_child drop constraint inh_check_constraint;
insert into invalid_check_con values(0);
alter table invalid_check_con_child add constraint inh_check_constraint check(f1 > 0);
alter table invalid_check_con add constraint inh_check_constraint check(f1 > 0) not valid;
NOTICE: merging constraint "inh_check_constraint" with inherited definition
insert into invalid_check_con values(0); -- fail
ERROR: new row for relation "invalid_check_con" violates check constraint "inh_check_constraint"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (0).
insert into invalid_check_con_child values(0); -- fail
ERROR: new row for relation "invalid_check_con_child" violates check constraint "inh_check_constraint"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (0).
select conrelid::regclass::text as relname, conname,
convalidated, conislocal, coninhcount, connoinherit
from pg_constraint where conname like 'inh\_check\_constraint%'
order by 1, 2;
relname | conname | convalidated | conislocal | coninhcount | connoinherit
-------------------------+----------------------+--------------+------------+-------------+--------------
invalid_check_con | inh_check_constraint | f | t | 0 | f
invalid_check_con_child | inh_check_constraint | t | t | 1 | f
(2 rows)
-- We don't drop the invalid_check_con* tables, to test dump/reload with
--
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
-- Test parameterized append plans for inheritance trees
--
create temp table patest0 (id, x) as
select x, x from generate_series(0,1000) x;
create temp table patest1() inherits (patest0);
insert into patest1
select x, x from generate_series(0,1000) x;
create temp table patest2() inherits (patest0);
insert into patest2
select x, x from generate_series(0,1000) x;
create index patest0i on patest0(id);
create index patest1i on patest1(id);
create index patest2i on patest2(id);
analyze patest0;
analyze patest1;
analyze patest2;
explain (costs off)
select * from patest0 join (select f1 from int4_tbl limit 1) ss on id = f1;
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
Nested Loop
-> Limit
-> Seq Scan on int4_tbl
-> Append
-> Index Scan using patest0i on patest0
Index Cond: (id = int4_tbl.f1)
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
-> Index Scan using patest1i on patest1
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
Index Cond: (id = int4_tbl.f1)
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
-> Index Scan using patest2i on patest2
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
Index Cond: (id = int4_tbl.f1)
(10 rows)
select * from patest0 join (select f1 from int4_tbl limit 1) ss on id = f1;
id | x | f1
----+---+----
0 | 0 | 0
0 | 0 | 0
0 | 0 | 0
(3 rows)
drop index patest2i;
explain (costs off)
select * from patest0 join (select f1 from int4_tbl limit 1) ss on id = f1;
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
Nested Loop
-> Limit
-> Seq Scan on int4_tbl
-> Append
-> Index Scan using patest0i on patest0
Index Cond: (id = int4_tbl.f1)
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
-> Index Scan using patest1i on patest1
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
Index Cond: (id = int4_tbl.f1)
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
-> Seq Scan on patest2
Revise parameterized-path mechanism to fix assorted issues. This patch adjusts the treatment of parameterized paths so that all paths with the same parameterization (same set of required outer rels) for the same relation will have the same rowcount estimate. We cache the rowcount estimates to ensure that property, and hopefully save a few cycles too. Doing this makes it practical for add_path_precheck to operate without a rowcount estimate: it need only assume that paths with different parameterizations never dominate each other, which is close enough to true anyway for coarse filtering, because normally a more-parameterized path should yield fewer rows thanks to having more join clauses to apply. In add_path, we do the full nine yards of comparing rowcount estimates along with everything else, so that we can discard parameterized paths that don't actually have an advantage. This fixes some issues I'd found with add_path rejecting parameterized paths on the grounds that they were more expensive than not-parameterized ones, even though they yielded many fewer rows and hence would be cheaper once subsequent joining was considered. To make the same-rowcounts assumption valid, we have to require that any parameterized path enforce *all* join clauses that could be obtained from the particular set of outer rels, even if not all of them are useful for indexing. This is required at both base scans and joins. It's a good thing anyway since the net impact is that join quals are checked at the lowest practical level in the join tree. Hence, discard the original rather ad-hoc mechanism for choosing parameterization joinquals, and build a better one that has a more principled rule for when clauses can be moved. The original rule was actually buggy anyway for lack of knowledge about which relations are part of an outer join's outer side; getting this right requires adding an outer_relids field to RestrictInfo.
2012-04-19 21:52:46 +02:00
Filter: (int4_tbl.f1 = id)
(10 rows)
select * from patest0 join (select f1 from int4_tbl limit 1) ss on id = f1;
id | x | f1
----+---+----
0 | 0 | 0
0 | 0 | 0
0 | 0 | 0
(3 rows)
drop table patest0 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to 2 other objects
DETAIL: drop cascades to table patest1
drop cascades to table patest2
--
-- Test merge-append plans for inheritance trees
--
create table matest0 (id serial primary key, name text);
create table matest1 (id integer primary key) inherits (matest0);
NOTICE: merging column "id" with inherited definition
create table matest2 (id integer primary key) inherits (matest0);
NOTICE: merging column "id" with inherited definition
create table matest3 (id integer primary key) inherits (matest0);
NOTICE: merging column "id" with inherited definition
create index matest0i on matest0 ((1-id));
create index matest1i on matest1 ((1-id));
-- create index matest2i on matest2 ((1-id)); -- intentionally missing
create index matest3i on matest3 ((1-id));
insert into matest1 (name) values ('Test 1');
insert into matest1 (name) values ('Test 2');
insert into matest2 (name) values ('Test 3');
insert into matest2 (name) values ('Test 4');
insert into matest3 (name) values ('Test 5');
insert into matest3 (name) values ('Test 6');
set enable_indexscan = off; -- force use of seqscan/sort, so no merge
explain (verbose, costs off) select * from matest0 order by 1-id;
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------
Sort
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
Output: matest0.id, matest0.name, ((1 - matest0.id))
Sort Key: ((1 - matest0.id))
-> Result
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
Output: matest0.id, matest0.name, (1 - matest0.id)
-> Append
-> Seq Scan on public.matest0
Improve ruleutils.c's heuristics for dealing with rangetable aliases. The previous scheme had bugs in some corner cases involving tables that had been renamed since a view was made. This could result in dumped views that failed to reload or reloaded incorrectly, as seen in bug #7553 from Lloyd Albin, as well as in some pgsql-hackers discussion back in January. Also, its behavior for printing EXPLAIN plans was sometimes confusing because of willingness to use the same alias for multiple RTEs (it was Ashutosh Bapat's complaint about that aspect that started the January thread). To fix, ensure that each RTE in the query has a unique unqualified alias, by modifying the alias if necessary (we add "_" and digits as needed to create a non-conflicting name). Then we can just print its variables with that alias, avoiding the confusing and bug-prone scheme of sometimes schema-qualifying variable names. In EXPLAIN, it proves to be expedient to take the further step of only assigning such aliases to RTEs that are actually referenced in the query, since the planner has a habit of generating extra RTEs with the same alias in situations such as inheritance-tree expansion. Although this fixes a bug of very long standing, I'm hesitant to back-patch such a noticeable behavioral change. My experiments while creating a regression test convinced me that actually incorrect output (as opposed to confusing output) occurs only in very narrow cases, which is backed up by the lack of previous complaints from the field. So we may be better off living with it in released branches; and in any case it'd be smart to let this ripen awhile in HEAD before we consider back-patching it.
2012-09-22 01:03:10 +02:00
Output: matest0.id, matest0.name
-> Seq Scan on public.matest1
Output: matest1.id, matest1.name
-> Seq Scan on public.matest2
Output: matest2.id, matest2.name
-> Seq Scan on public.matest3
Output: matest3.id, matest3.name
(14 rows)
select * from matest0 order by 1-id;
id | name
----+--------
6 | Test 6
5 | Test 5
4 | Test 4
3 | Test 3
2 | Test 2
1 | Test 1
(6 rows)
explain (verbose, costs off) select min(1-id) from matest0;
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------
Aggregate
Output: min((1 - matest0.id))
-> Append
-> Seq Scan on public.matest0
Output: matest0.id
-> Seq Scan on public.matest1
Output: matest1.id
-> Seq Scan on public.matest2
Output: matest2.id
-> Seq Scan on public.matest3
Output: matest3.id
(11 rows)
select min(1-id) from matest0;
min
-----
-5
(1 row)
reset enable_indexscan;
set enable_seqscan = off; -- plan with fewest seqscans should be merge
explain (verbose, costs off) select * from matest0 order by 1-id;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------------
Merge Append
Sort Key: ((1 - matest0.id))
-> Index Scan using matest0i on public.matest0
Output: matest0.id, matest0.name, (1 - matest0.id)
-> Index Scan using matest1i on public.matest1
Output: matest1.id, matest1.name, (1 - matest1.id)
-> Sort
Output: matest2.id, matest2.name, ((1 - matest2.id))
Sort Key: ((1 - matest2.id))
-> Seq Scan on public.matest2
Output: matest2.id, matest2.name, (1 - matest2.id)
-> Index Scan using matest3i on public.matest3
Output: matest3.id, matest3.name, (1 - matest3.id)
(13 rows)
select * from matest0 order by 1-id;
id | name
----+--------
6 | Test 6
5 | Test 5
4 | Test 4
3 | Test 3
2 | Test 2
1 | Test 1
(6 rows)
explain (verbose, costs off) select min(1-id) from matest0;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Result
Output: $0
InitPlan 1 (returns $0)
-> Limit
Output: ((1 - matest0.id))
-> Result
Output: ((1 - matest0.id))
-> Merge Append
Sort Key: ((1 - matest0.id))
-> Index Scan using matest0i on public.matest0
Output: matest0.id, (1 - matest0.id)
Index Cond: ((1 - matest0.id) IS NOT NULL)
-> Index Scan using matest1i on public.matest1
Output: matest1.id, (1 - matest1.id)
Index Cond: ((1 - matest1.id) IS NOT NULL)
-> Sort
Output: matest2.id, ((1 - matest2.id))
Sort Key: ((1 - matest2.id))
-> Bitmap Heap Scan on public.matest2
Output: matest2.id, (1 - matest2.id)
Filter: ((1 - matest2.id) IS NOT NULL)
-> Bitmap Index Scan on matest2_pkey
-> Index Scan using matest3i on public.matest3
Output: matest3.id, (1 - matest3.id)
Index Cond: ((1 - matest3.id) IS NOT NULL)
(25 rows)
select min(1-id) from matest0;
min
-----
-5
(1 row)
reset enable_seqscan;
drop table matest0 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to 3 other objects
DETAIL: drop cascades to table matest1
drop cascades to table matest2
drop cascades to table matest3
--
-- Check that use of an index with an extraneous column doesn't produce
-- a plan with extraneous sorting
--
create table matest0 (a int, b int, c int, d int);
create table matest1 () inherits(matest0);
create index matest0i on matest0 (b, c);
create index matest1i on matest1 (b, c);
set enable_nestloop = off; -- we want a plan with two MergeAppends
explain (costs off)
select t1.* from matest0 t1, matest0 t2
where t1.b = t2.b and t2.c = t2.d
order by t1.b limit 10;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit
-> Merge Join
Merge Cond: (t1.b = t2.b)
-> Merge Append
Sort Key: t1.b
-> Index Scan using matest0i on matest0 t1
-> Index Scan using matest1i on matest1 t1_1
-> Materialize
-> Merge Append
Sort Key: t2.b
-> Index Scan using matest0i on matest0 t2
Filter: (c = d)
-> Index Scan using matest1i on matest1 t2_1
Filter: (c = d)
(14 rows)
reset enable_nestloop;
drop table matest0 cascade;
NOTICE: drop cascades to table matest1
--
-- Test merge-append for UNION ALL append relations
--
set enable_seqscan = off;
set enable_indexscan = on;
set enable_bitmapscan = off;
Revisit handling of UNION ALL subqueries with non-Var output columns. In commit 57664ed25e5dea117158a2e663c29e60b3546e1c I tried to fix a bug reported by Teodor Sigaev by making non-simple-Var output columns distinct (by wrapping their expressions with dummy PlaceHolderVar nodes). This did not work too well. Commit b28ffd0fcc583c1811e5295279e7d4366c3cae6c fixed some ensuing problems with matching to child indexes, but per a recent report from Claus Stadler, constraint exclusion of UNION ALL subqueries was still broken, because constant-simplification didn't handle the injected PlaceHolderVars well either. On reflection, the original patch was quite misguided: there is no reason to expect that EquivalenceClass child members will be distinct. So instead of trying to make them so, we should ensure that we can cope with the situation when they're not. Accordingly, this patch reverts the code changes in the above-mentioned commits (though the regression test cases they added stay). Instead, I've added assorted defenses to make sure that duplicate EC child members don't cause any problems. Teodor's original problem ("MergeAppend child's targetlist doesn't match MergeAppend") is addressed more directly by revising prepare_sort_from_pathkeys to let the parent MergeAppend's sort list guide creation of each child's sort list. In passing, get rid of add_sort_column; as far as I can tell, testing for duplicate sort keys at this stage is dead code. Certainly it doesn't trigger often enough to be worth expending cycles on in ordinary queries. And keeping the test would've greatly complicated the new logic in prepare_sort_from_pathkeys, because comparing pathkey list entries against a previous output array requires that we not skip any entries in the list. Back-patch to 9.1, like the previous patches. The only known issue in this area that wasn't caused by the ill-advised previous patches was the MergeAppend planning failure, which of course is not relevant before 9.1. It's possible that we need some of the new defenses against duplicate child EC entries in older branches, but until there's some clear evidence of that I'm going to refrain from back-patching further.
2012-03-16 18:11:12 +01:00
-- Check handling of duplicated, constant, or volatile targetlist items
explain (costs off)
SELECT thousand, tenthous FROM tenk1
UNION ALL
SELECT thousand, thousand FROM tenk1
ORDER BY thousand, tenthous;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merge Append
Sort Key: tenk1.thousand, tenk1.tenthous
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1
-> Sort
Sort Key: tenk1_1.thousand, tenk1_1.thousand
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1 tenk1_1
(6 rows)
explain (costs off)
SELECT thousand, tenthous, thousand+tenthous AS x FROM tenk1
UNION ALL
SELECT 42, 42, hundred FROM tenk1
ORDER BY thousand, tenthous;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------------------------
Merge Append
Sort Key: tenk1.thousand, tenk1.tenthous
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1
-> Sort
Sort Key: 42, 42
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_hundred on tenk1 tenk1_1
(6 rows)
explain (costs off)
SELECT thousand, tenthous FROM tenk1
UNION ALL
SELECT thousand, random()::integer FROM tenk1
ORDER BY thousand, tenthous;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merge Append
Sort Key: tenk1.thousand, tenk1.tenthous
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1
-> Sort
Sort Key: tenk1_1.thousand, ((random())::integer)
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1 tenk1_1
(6 rows)
Revisit handling of UNION ALL subqueries with non-Var output columns. In commit 57664ed25e5dea117158a2e663c29e60b3546e1c I tried to fix a bug reported by Teodor Sigaev by making non-simple-Var output columns distinct (by wrapping their expressions with dummy PlaceHolderVar nodes). This did not work too well. Commit b28ffd0fcc583c1811e5295279e7d4366c3cae6c fixed some ensuing problems with matching to child indexes, but per a recent report from Claus Stadler, constraint exclusion of UNION ALL subqueries was still broken, because constant-simplification didn't handle the injected PlaceHolderVars well either. On reflection, the original patch was quite misguided: there is no reason to expect that EquivalenceClass child members will be distinct. So instead of trying to make them so, we should ensure that we can cope with the situation when they're not. Accordingly, this patch reverts the code changes in the above-mentioned commits (though the regression test cases they added stay). Instead, I've added assorted defenses to make sure that duplicate EC child members don't cause any problems. Teodor's original problem ("MergeAppend child's targetlist doesn't match MergeAppend") is addressed more directly by revising prepare_sort_from_pathkeys to let the parent MergeAppend's sort list guide creation of each child's sort list. In passing, get rid of add_sort_column; as far as I can tell, testing for duplicate sort keys at this stage is dead code. Certainly it doesn't trigger often enough to be worth expending cycles on in ordinary queries. And keeping the test would've greatly complicated the new logic in prepare_sort_from_pathkeys, because comparing pathkey list entries against a previous output array requires that we not skip any entries in the list. Back-patch to 9.1, like the previous patches. The only known issue in this area that wasn't caused by the ill-advised previous patches was the MergeAppend planning failure, which of course is not relevant before 9.1. It's possible that we need some of the new defenses against duplicate child EC entries in older branches, but until there's some clear evidence of that I'm going to refrain from back-patching further.
2012-03-16 18:11:12 +01:00
-- Check min/max aggregate optimization
explain (costs off)
SELECT min(x) FROM
(SELECT unique1 AS x FROM tenk1 a
UNION ALL
SELECT unique2 AS x FROM tenk1 b) s;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Result
InitPlan 1 (returns $0)
-> Limit
-> Merge Append
Sort Key: a.unique1
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_unique1 on tenk1 a
Index Cond: (unique1 IS NOT NULL)
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_unique2 on tenk1 b
Index Cond: (unique2 IS NOT NULL)
(9 rows)
explain (costs off)
SELECT min(y) FROM
(SELECT unique1 AS x, unique1 AS y FROM tenk1 a
UNION ALL
SELECT unique2 AS x, unique2 AS y FROM tenk1 b) s;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Result
InitPlan 1 (returns $0)
-> Limit
-> Merge Append
Sort Key: a.unique1
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_unique1 on tenk1 a
Index Cond: (unique1 IS NOT NULL)
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_unique2 on tenk1 b
Index Cond: (unique2 IS NOT NULL)
(9 rows)
-- XXX planner doesn't recognize that index on unique2 is sufficiently sorted
explain (costs off)
SELECT x, y FROM
(SELECT thousand AS x, tenthous AS y FROM tenk1 a
UNION ALL
SELECT unique2 AS x, unique2 AS y FROM tenk1 b) s
ORDER BY x, y;
QUERY PLAN
-------------------------------------------------------------
Merge Append
Sort Key: a.thousand, a.tenthous
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_thous_tenthous on tenk1 a
-> Sort
Sort Key: b.unique2, b.unique2
-> Index Only Scan using tenk1_unique2 on tenk1 b
(6 rows)
Revisit handling of UNION ALL subqueries with non-Var output columns. In commit 57664ed25e5dea117158a2e663c29e60b3546e1c I tried to fix a bug reported by Teodor Sigaev by making non-simple-Var output columns distinct (by wrapping their expressions with dummy PlaceHolderVar nodes). This did not work too well. Commit b28ffd0fcc583c1811e5295279e7d4366c3cae6c fixed some ensuing problems with matching to child indexes, but per a recent report from Claus Stadler, constraint exclusion of UNION ALL subqueries was still broken, because constant-simplification didn't handle the injected PlaceHolderVars well either. On reflection, the original patch was quite misguided: there is no reason to expect that EquivalenceClass child members will be distinct. So instead of trying to make them so, we should ensure that we can cope with the situation when they're not. Accordingly, this patch reverts the code changes in the above-mentioned commits (though the regression test cases they added stay). Instead, I've added assorted defenses to make sure that duplicate EC child members don't cause any problems. Teodor's original problem ("MergeAppend child's targetlist doesn't match MergeAppend") is addressed more directly by revising prepare_sort_from_pathkeys to let the parent MergeAppend's sort list guide creation of each child's sort list. In passing, get rid of add_sort_column; as far as I can tell, testing for duplicate sort keys at this stage is dead code. Certainly it doesn't trigger often enough to be worth expending cycles on in ordinary queries. And keeping the test would've greatly complicated the new logic in prepare_sort_from_pathkeys, because comparing pathkey list entries against a previous output array requires that we not skip any entries in the list. Back-patch to 9.1, like the previous patches. The only known issue in this area that wasn't caused by the ill-advised previous patches was the MergeAppend planning failure, which of course is not relevant before 9.1. It's possible that we need some of the new defenses against duplicate child EC entries in older branches, but until there's some clear evidence of that I'm going to refrain from back-patching further.
2012-03-16 18:11:12 +01:00
-- exercise rescan code path via a repeatedly-evaluated subquery
explain (costs off)
SELECT
ARRAY(SELECT f.i FROM (
(SELECT d + g.i FROM generate_series(4, 30, 3) d ORDER BY 1)
UNION ALL
(SELECT d + g.i FROM generate_series(0, 30, 5) d ORDER BY 1)
) f(i)
ORDER BY f.i LIMIT 10)
FROM generate_series(1, 3) g(i);
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------------
Function Scan on generate_series g
SubPlan 1
-> Limit
-> Merge Append
Sort Key: ((d.d + g.i))
-> Sort
Sort Key: ((d.d + g.i))
-> Function Scan on generate_series d
-> Sort
Sort Key: ((d_1.d + g.i))
-> Function Scan on generate_series d_1
(11 rows)
SELECT
ARRAY(SELECT f.i FROM (
(SELECT d + g.i FROM generate_series(4, 30, 3) d ORDER BY 1)
UNION ALL
(SELECT d + g.i FROM generate_series(0, 30, 5) d ORDER BY 1)
) f(i)
ORDER BY f.i LIMIT 10)
FROM generate_series(1, 3) g(i);
array
------------------------------
{1,5,6,8,11,11,14,16,17,20}
{2,6,7,9,12,12,15,17,18,21}
{3,7,8,10,13,13,16,18,19,22}
(3 rows)
reset enable_seqscan;
reset enable_indexscan;
reset enable_bitmapscan;
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
--
-- Check that constraint exclusion works correctly with partitions using
-- implicit constraints generated from the partition bound information.
--
create table list_parted (
a varchar
) partition by list (a);
create table part_ab_cd partition of list_parted for values in ('ab', 'cd');
create table part_ef_gh partition of list_parted for values in ('ef', 'gh');
create table part_null_xy partition of list_parted for values in (null, 'xy');
explain (costs off) select * from list_parted;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_ab_cd
-> Seq Scan on part_ef_gh
-> Seq Scan on part_null_xy
(4 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from list_parted where a is null;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_null_xy
Filter: (a IS NULL)
(3 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from list_parted where a is not null;
QUERY PLAN
---------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_ab_cd
Filter: (a IS NOT NULL)
-> Seq Scan on part_ef_gh
Filter: (a IS NOT NULL)
-> Seq Scan on part_null_xy
Filter: (a IS NOT NULL)
(7 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from list_parted where a in ('ab', 'cd', 'ef');
QUERY PLAN
----------------------------------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_ab_cd
Filter: ((a)::text = ANY ('{ab,cd,ef}'::text[]))
-> Seq Scan on part_ef_gh
Filter: ((a)::text = ANY ('{ab,cd,ef}'::text[]))
(5 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from list_parted where a = 'ab' or a in (null, 'cd');
QUERY PLAN
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_ab_cd
Filter: (((a)::text = 'ab'::text) OR ((a)::text = ANY ('{NULL,cd}'::text[])))
-> Seq Scan on part_ef_gh
Filter: (((a)::text = 'ab'::text) OR ((a)::text = ANY ('{NULL,cd}'::text[])))
-> Seq Scan on part_null_xy
Filter: (((a)::text = 'ab'::text) OR ((a)::text = ANY ('{NULL,cd}'::text[])))
(7 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from list_parted where a = 'ab';
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_ab_cd
Filter: ((a)::text = 'ab'::text)
(3 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
create table range_list_parted (
a int,
b char(2)
) partition by range (a);
create table part_1_10 partition of range_list_parted for values from (1) to (10) partition by list (b);
create table part_1_10_ab partition of part_1_10 for values in ('ab');
create table part_1_10_cd partition of part_1_10 for values in ('cd');
create table part_10_20 partition of range_list_parted for values from (10) to (20) partition by list (b);
create table part_10_20_ab partition of part_10_20 for values in ('ab');
create table part_10_20_cd partition of part_10_20 for values in ('cd');
create table part_21_30 partition of range_list_parted for values from (21) to (30) partition by list (b);
create table part_21_30_ab partition of part_21_30 for values in ('ab');
create table part_21_30_cd partition of part_21_30 for values in ('cd');
create table part_40_inf partition of range_list_parted for values from (40) to (unbounded) partition by list (b);
create table part_40_inf_ab partition of part_40_inf for values in ('ab');
create table part_40_inf_cd partition of part_40_inf for values in ('cd');
create table part_40_inf_null partition of part_40_inf for values in (null);
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_ab
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_cd
-> Seq Scan on part_10_20_ab
-> Seq Scan on part_10_20_cd
-> Seq Scan on part_21_30_ab
-> Seq Scan on part_21_30_cd
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_ab
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_cd
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_null
(10 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where a = 5;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------------
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_ab
Filter: (a = 5)
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_cd
Filter: (a = 5)
(5 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where b = 'ab';
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_ab
Filter: (b = 'ab'::bpchar)
-> Seq Scan on part_10_20_ab
Filter: (b = 'ab'::bpchar)
-> Seq Scan on part_21_30_ab
Filter: (b = 'ab'::bpchar)
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_ab
Filter: (b = 'ab'::bpchar)
(9 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where a between 3 and 23 and b in ('ab');
QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_ab
Filter: ((a >= 3) AND (a <= 23) AND (b = 'ab'::bpchar))
-> Seq Scan on part_10_20_ab
Filter: ((a >= 3) AND (a <= 23) AND (b = 'ab'::bpchar))
-> Seq Scan on part_21_30_ab
Filter: ((a >= 3) AND (a <= 23) AND (b = 'ab'::bpchar))
(7 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
/* Should select no rows because range partition key cannot be null */
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where a is null;
QUERY PLAN
--------------------------
Result
One-Time Filter: false
(2 rows)
/* Should only select rows from the null-accepting partition */
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where b is null;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_null
Filter: (b IS NULL)
(3 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where a is not null and a < 67;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------------------
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_ab
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_1_10_cd
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_10_20_ab
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_10_20_cd
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_21_30_ab
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_21_30_cd
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_ab
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_cd
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_null
Filter: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a < 67))
(19 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
explain (costs off) select * from range_list_parted where a >= 30;
QUERY PLAN
------------------------------------
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
Append
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_ab
Filter: (a >= 30)
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_cd
Filter: (a >= 30)
-> Seq Scan on part_40_inf_null
Filter: (a >= 30)
(7 rows)
Implement table partitioning. Table partitioning is like table inheritance and reuses much of the existing infrastructure, but there are some important differences. The parent is called a partitioned table and is always empty; it may not have indexes or non-inherited constraints, since those make no sense for a relation with no data of its own. The children are called partitions and contain all of the actual data. Each partition has an implicit partitioning constraint. Multiple inheritance is not allowed, and partitioning and inheritance can't be mixed. Partitions can't have extra columns and may not allow nulls unless the parent does. Tuples inserted into the parent are automatically routed to the correct partition, so tuple-routing ON INSERT triggers are not needed. Tuple routing isn't yet supported for partitions which are foreign tables, and it doesn't handle updates that cross partition boundaries. Currently, tables can be range-partitioned or list-partitioned. List partitioning is limited to a single column, but range partitioning can involve multiple columns. A partitioning "column" can be an expression. Because table partitioning is less general than table inheritance, it is hoped that it will be easier to reason about properties of partitions, and therefore that this will serve as a better foundation for a variety of possible optimizations, including query planner optimizations. The tuple routing based which this patch does based on the implicit partitioning constraints is an example of this, but it seems likely that many other useful optimizations are also possible. Amit Langote, reviewed and tested by Robert Haas, Ashutosh Bapat, Amit Kapila, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi, Corey Huinker, Jaime Casanova, Rushabh Lathia, Erik Rijkers, among others. Minor revisions by me.
2016-12-07 19:17:43 +01:00
drop table list_parted;
drop table range_list_parted;