Re: Performance impact of hundreds of partitions

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>
Cc: Leonardo F <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance impact of hundreds of partitions
Date: 2010-04-21 20:12:42
Message-ID: 20100421201242.GD3762@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Vick Khera wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Leonardo F <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> wrote:
> > "The partitioning code isn't designed to scale beyond a few dozen partitions"
> >
> > Is it mainly a planning problem or an execution time problem?
> >
>
> I'll bet that is related to the planning and constraint exclusion
> parts. I have a couple of tables split into 100 partitions, and they
> work extremely well.

Keep in mind that 100 is only 8 dozen ...

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martin Gainty 2010-04-21 20:37:44 Re: Avoiding surrogate keys
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2010-04-21 19:56:11 Re: Avoiding surrogate keys