Re: Large number of partitions of a table

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large number of partitions of a table
Date: 2022-01-17 14:58:32
Message-ID: 3992395.1642431512@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 1/16/22 11:38 PM, Victor Sudakov wrote:
>> so no query should ever have to use more than 1 partition.

> I find it hard to believe that you'll *never* run a report against more
> customers than are in a single partition.

Yeah, I'm a little suspicious of that. The other thing I'd be worried
about, given that the OP is using v13, is that UPDATE/DELETE planning
performance can be pretty awful with lots of partitions. There were
some O(N^2) behaviors in there that we didn't get rid of till v14.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2022-01-17 15:14:43 Re: Large number of partitions of a table
Previous Message Ron 2022-01-17 14:41:34 Re: Large number of partitions of a table