On Tue, 6 May 2025 at 03:59, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 09:42:10PM +1200, David Rowley wrote: > > I agree that 88f55bc97 and d69d45a5a should be in their own item. > > Likely no need to go into detail about the speed up being about > > "EquivalenceClass lookups". I imagine something like "Reduce planner > > overheads when planning queries to partitioned and inheritance parent > > tables" > > > > Then for bb3ec16e1, d47cbf474, cbc127917 and 525392d57, something like > > "Defer locking of partitions during execution until after partition > > elimination". The release notes for 11.0 called it "partition > > elimination", so I went with that naming. > > Okay, I split them up and went with the attached patch.
> +Allow partitions to be pruned more efficienty (Ashutosh Bapat, Yuya Watari, > David Rowley) I think you've misunderstood what's been changed here. Unfortunately, it's not even true with a bit of eye squinting as these changes have nothing to do with partition pruning. I think it would be much more informative to state it as I suggested. Also, the spelling of "efficiently" needs adjusted. > +Avoid the locking of pruned partitions during planning (Amit Langote) At the very least, you'd need to swap "planning" for "execution" as the above statement isn't true. David
