Re: Partitioning and performance

From: Ravi Krishna <sravikrishna3(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jan Lentfer <Jan(dot)Lentfer(at)web(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Partitioning and performance
Date: 2015-05-28 17:07:29
Message-ID: CACER=P0vFkKb9v3gkzECzVkM6=df5LP9s-Cs9SUycN3huAkddg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> By and large, though, this doesn't really matter, since an empty
> parent table won't cost anything much to scan. If it's significant
> relative to the child table access time then you probably didn't
> need partitioning in the first place.

Is there a rule of thumb as to at what size does the partitioning
start performing better than non partitioned table.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ravi Krishna 2015-05-28 17:12:20 Re: Partitioning and performance
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2015-05-28 17:04:40 Re: WAL Streaming Failure PostgreSQL 9.4