Re: Partitioned table performance
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Partitioned table performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200412051506.41025.josh@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Partitioned table performance ("Stacy White" <harsh@computer.org>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Stacy, Thanks for the stats! > In some cases we've seen some increased performance in tests by splitting > the table into several smaller tables. Both 'UNION ALL' views, and the > superclass/subclass scheme work well at pruning down the set of rows a > query uses, but they seem to introduce a large performance hit to the time > to process each row (~50% for superclass/subclass, and ~150% for union > views). This seems reasonable, actually, given your test. Really, what you should be comparing it against is not against selecting from an individual partition, but selecting from the whole business as one large table. I also suspect that wider rows results in less overhead proportionally; note that your test contains *only* the indexed rows. I should soon have a test to prove this, hopefully. However, I would be interested in seeing EXPLAIN ANALYZE from your tests rather than just EXPLAIN. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: