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. +
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. |