RE: How to make partitioning scale better for larger numbers of partitions

From: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: "Kato, Sho" <kato-sho(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: 'Amit Langote' <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: How to make partitioning scale better for larger numbers of partitions
Date: 2018-07-16 04:16:22
Message-ID: 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FA5091E@G01JPEXMBYT05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

From: Kato, Sho [mailto:kato-sho(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com]
> I did pgbench -M prepared and perf record.
>
> UPDATE latency in prepared mode is 95% shorter than in simple mode.
> SELECT latency in prepared mode is 54% shorter than in simple mode.
> INSERT latency in prepared mode is 8% shorter than in simple mode.

Thanks. And what does the comparison look like between the unpartitioned case and various partition counts? What's the performance characteristics in terms of the latency and partition count? I thought that's what you tried to reveal first?

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2018-07-16 04:27:18 Re: Internal error XX000 with enable_partition_pruning=on, pg 11 beta1 on Debian
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2018-07-16 02:54:27 Re: patch to allow disable of WAL recycling