Re: How Many Partitions are Good Performing

From: Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)notorand(dot)it>
To: Andrew Staller <andrew(at)timescale(dot)com>
Cc: Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com>, "Kumar, Virendra" <Virendra(dot)Kumar(at)guycarp(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How Many Partitions are Good Performing
Date: 2018-01-09 17:25:03
Message-ID: CAHjZ2x7P04bu9SvHQdwtKcQH9qqoh3nO7GHiwDWe-06oVh977Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

2018-01-09 18:15 GMT+01:00 Andrew Staller <andrew(at)timescale(dot)com>:

> This is the blog post that Rakesh referenced:
> https://blog.timescale.com/time-series-data-postgresql-
> 10-vs-timescaledb-816ee808bac5
>
> Please note, this analysis is done in the context of working with
> time-series data, where 1000s of chunks is not uncommon because of the
> append-mostly nature of the workload.
>
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 6:54 PM, Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> You should have read carefully what I wrote. 1000 is not an upper
>> limit. 1000 partition is the number after which performance starts
>> dropping .
>>
>> There is a blog in www.timescale.com which also highlights the same.
>>
>> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 at 6:20 PM
>> From: "Kumar, Virendra" <Virendra(dot)Kumar(at)guycarp(dot)com>
>> To: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>> Subject: How Many Partitions are Good Performing
>>
>> Can somebody tell us how many partitions are good number without
>> impacting the performance. We are hearing around a thousand, is that a
>> limit. Do we have plan to increase the number of partitions for a table. We
>> would appreciate if somebody can help us with this?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Virendra
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain
>> information that is PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
>>
>> If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
>> dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>> received this communication in error, please erase all copies of the
>> message
>> and its attachments and notify the sender immediately. Thank you.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> TimescaleDB* | *Growth & Developer Evangelism
> c: 908.581.9509
>
> 335 Madison Ave.
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=335+Madison+Ave.%C2%A0New+York,+NY%C2%A010017&entry=gmail&source=g>
> New York, NY 10017
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=335+Madison+Ave.%C2%A0New+York,+NY%C2%A010017&entry=gmail&source=g>
> http://www.timescale.com/
> https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb
>

The data about the query performances would have shed more light on the
situation.
Unluckily there's none. Weird!

--
Vincenzo Romano - NotOrAnd.IT
Information Technologies
--
NON QVIETIS MARIBVS NAVTA PERITVS

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rakesh Kumar 2018-01-09 17:42:07 data-checksums
Previous Message Kumar, Virendra 2018-01-09 17:21:48 RE: How Many Partitions are Good Performing