Hi Mark, On 2017/12/20 6:46, Mark Dilger wrote: >> On Dec 12, 2017, at 10:32 PM, Amit Langote <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> >> wrote: >> Added to CF: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/16/1410/ > > This compiles and passes the regression tests for me.
Thanks for the review. > I extended your test a bit to check whether partitions over booleans are > useful. > Note specifically the 'explain' output, which does not seem to restrict the > scan > to just the relevant partitions. You could easily argue that this is beyond > the scope > of your patch (and therefore not your problem), but I doubt it makes much > sense > to have boolean partitions without planner support for skipping partitions > like is > done for tables partitioned over other data types. Yeah. Actually, I'm aware that the planner doesn't work this. While constraint exclusion (planner's current method of skipping partitions) does not work with IS TRUE/FALSE/UNKNOWN clauses, the new partition pruning patch [1] addresses that. In fact, I started this thread prompted by some discussion about Boolean partitions on that thread [2]. That said, someone might argue that we should also fix constraint exclusion (the current method of partition pruning) so that partition skipping works correctly for Boolean partitions. Thanks, Amit [1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/15/1272/ [2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/9b98fc47-34b8-0ab6-27fc-c8a0889f2e5b%40lab.ntt.co.jp
