Re: huge memory of Postgresql backend process

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "James Pang (chaolpan)" <chaolpan(at)cisco(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: huge memory of Postgresql backend process
Date: 2022-09-08 21:42:19
Message-ID: CAApHDvoSOQpgxXnCDH1wZ9xmR+XmQprMBAJ09tVYrA2JezqhmQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 01:48, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Moreover, HASH partitioning is effectively incapable of being
> pruned, so that every query is going to touch every partition.
> (IMO, hash partitioning is basically never a good idea.)

I think that might have only briefly been true during the v11 cycle,
but by the time the release came we had hash partition and partition
pruning.

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Japin Li 2022-09-09 01:07:04 Re: BUG #17610: Use of multiple composite types incompatible with record-typed function parameter
Previous Message David Rowley 2022-09-08 21:35:04 Re: huge memory of Postgresql backend process