Re: inheritance, and plans - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
Subject Re: inheritance, and plans
Date
Msg-id 2f4958ff0902070259x2954ed78ob5ac746b14ae6c21@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: inheritance, and plans  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: inheritance, and plans
List pgsql-performance
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The UNION arms have to all be the same data type in order to have
> restrictions pushed down through the UNION.  You did not show us
> the table declarations for your first example, but I bet that updateid
> isn't the same type in both.  (And yes, a domain is different from its
> underlying type for this purpose.)
I think you're right. The domain's in both cases (updateid and uri)
are bigints default nextval('something') not null;

and the r.history table's ones are just bigints not null. Same
underlying type, but not a domain. I'll try to alter it to domain
type, and see.

thanks.


--
GJ

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Finneid
Date:
Subject: Re: explanation of some configs
Next
From: Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz
Date:
Subject: Re: inheritance, and plans