Re: 2D partitioning of VLDB - sane or not?
От | Gregory Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 2D partitioning of VLDB - sane or not? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87hcn2mofu.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 2D partitioning of VLDB - sane or not? ("Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <Andreas.Zeugswetter@s-itsolutions.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <Andreas.Zeugswetter@s-itsolutions.at> writes: > I'd say that that point currently is well below 2000 partitions for all > common db systems. I think it will depend heavily on the type of queries you're talking about. Postgres's constraint_exclusion is a linear search and does quite a bit of work for each constraint. So it isn't terribly efficient for more than 1,000 partitions or so. *But* that only affects planning time. If your queries are always effectively pruned to few partitions and you execute them thousands of times then you not care about slow planning time. And if the overall table is large enough and you're dropping and loading partitions then you may still be benefiting from partitioning by keeping all the loaded records together and allowing dropping a partition to be constant time. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: