Re: [table partitioning] How many partitions are possibel?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle(at)tamay-dogan(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [table partitioning] How many partitions are possibel?
Date: 2017-12-27 00:48:18
Message-ID: 20171227004818.GC1727@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 11:04:55AM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> I like to make the partitions smaller, but the documentation say, you
> should not dare to make several 1000 partitions..

Even more than a hundred may be already risky in my opinion here. The
issue with a large number of partitioning using the pre-9.6 grammar
comes from the planning time which sky-rockets because the optimizer
uses a O(N^2) algorithm to consider all the partitions. The v10 grammar
does not take care of this planning problem as far as I recall, but v11
gets that better for partition-wise joins if my memory does not fail me.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stuart McGraw 2017-12-27 02:21:22 postgresql-10 for ubuntu-17.10 (artful)?
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-12-27 00:43:03 Re: Deadlock between concurrent index builds on different tables