X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4776F9FA4A8 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:35:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24646-02 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:35:15 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from m.wordtothewise.com (goliath.word-to-the-wise.com [208.187.80.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2D689FA42F for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:35:15 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [10.3.2.25] (184.word-to-the-wise.com [208.187.80.184]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by m.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4202AFF94 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:35:14 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) In-Reply-To: <44C12852.1040909@borderware.com> References: <44C12852.1040909@borderware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <76447686-0EB2-4482-B6A5-C7003BCF8DCE@blighty.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Steve Atkins Subject: Re: Partitioned tables in queries Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:34:34 -0700 To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.135 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200607/214 X-Sequence-Number: 20074 On Jul 21, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Kevin Keith wrote: > I have a case where I am partitioning tables based on a date range > in version 8.1.4. For example: > > table_with_millions_of_records > interaction_id char(16) primary key > start_date timestamp (without timezone) - indexed > .. other columns > > child_1 start_date >= 2006-07-21 00:00:00 > child_2 start_date >= 2006-07-20 00:00:00 and start_date < > 2006-07-21 00:00:00 > ... > child_5 start_date >= 2006-07-17 00:00:00 and start_date < > 2006-07-18 00:00:00 > > with rules on the parent and child tables that redirect the data to > the appropriate child table based on the start_date. > > Because this table is going to grow very large (very quickly), and > will need to be purged daily, I created partitions, or child tables > to hold data for each day. I have done the same thing in Oracle in > the past, and the PostgreSQL solution works great. The archival > process is very simple - drop the expired child table. I am having > one problem. > > If I run a query on the full table (there are 5 child tables with > data for the last 5 days), and my where clause contains data for > the current day only: > where start_date > date_trunc('day', now()) > all 5 child tables are scanned when I look at the output from > explain analyze. > > My question is - can I force the planner to only scan the relevant > child table - when the key related to the partitioned data it part > of the where clause? Yes. You'll need non-overlapping check constraints in each child table and to set constraint_exclusion to "on" in postgresql.conf. See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/ddl-partitioning.html for the gory details. Cheers, Steve