Re: PG11 - Multiple Key Range Partition
От | David Rowley |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PG11 - Multiple Key Range Partition |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAKJS1f-337sxhCzGq6-CYhscFg1abkaJ6f6gsCSkec6XdFpHiw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | PG11 - Multiple Key Range Partition (Rares Salcudean <rares.salcudean@takeofflabs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PG11 - Multiple Key Range Partition
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 21:17, Rares Salcudean <rares.salcudean@takeofflabs.com> wrote: > Currently, I'm trying to define a table with a range partition of 3 keys Recent, Deleted and Played At. > > There are multiple partitions: > > 1. scores_2018 (recent - false, deleted - false, played_at in (2018-01-01 / 2019-01-01) > 2. scores_2017 (recent - false, deleted - false, played_at in (2017-01-01 / 2018-01-01) > 3. scores_recent (recent - true, deleted - false, played_at in (1990-01-01 / 2090-01-01) > 4. scores_deleted (recent - false, deleted - true, played_at in (1990-01-01 / 2090-01-01) > > When inserting all works fine, but when doing a select statement it does not correctly query over the correct partition,It searches on all partitions. > > explain select * from scores where played_at = '2018-03-01' RANGE partitioning pruning works by the planner having knowledge that your WHERE clause cannot yield rows that are within a partition's range. Take your scores_2017 partition as an example, the range there is (false, false, '2017-01-01') to (false, false, '2018-01-01'). The planner cannot match your WHERE clause to that range since it's missing any predicate that matches a prefix of the range. This is similar to how a btree index on (recent, deleted, played_at) couldn't be used efficiently to give you just rows with played_at on any given date. You'd need something like: WHERE NOT recent AND NOT deleted AND played_at = '2018-03-01' for it to know only the scores_2018 partition can match. (There was a bug fixed recently that caused some partitions in a range partitioned table to be pruned accidentally, but you're not complaining about that.) You might want to look into sub-partitioning the table, however, see the note in [1] about that. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-partitioning.html#DDL-PARTITIONING-DECLARATIVE-BEST-PRACTICES -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: