Re: Hash partitioning.

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Yuri Levinsky <yuril(at)celltick(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hash partitioning.
Date: 2013-06-25 14:25:32
Message-ID: 20130625142532.GA18297@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 05:19:47PM +0300, Yuri Levinsky wrote:
> Bruce,
> Many thanks. According to PostgreSQL documentation it's only range and
> list partitions are supported. My question is: when I am following your
> advice, is PostgreSQL will do partitioning pruning on select? My
> expectation is:
> I divided my table on 128 hash partitions according let's say user_id.
> When I do select * from users where user_id=? , I am expecting the
> engine select from some particular partition according to my function.
> The issue is critical when you working with big tables, that you can't
> normally partition by range/list. The feature allow parallel select from
> such table: each thread might select from his own dedicated partition.
> The feature also (mainly) allow to decrease index b-tree level on
> partition key column by dividing index into smaller parts.

Uh, where do you see that we only support range and list? You aren't
using an EnterpriseDB closed-source product, are you?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2013-06-25 14:59:02 Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]
Previous Message Yuri Levinsky 2013-06-25 14:19:47 Re: Hash partitioning.