From: Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>
To: Colin Taylor <colin.taylor@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 07:39:21 -0800
Message-ID: <C1C7A5A9.17730%llonergan@greenplum.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84d3067d0701062037k3229c9ddjbde73b1fd79ee209@mail.gmail.com>
Colin,
On 1/6/07 8:37 PM, "Colin Taylor" <colin.taylor@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi there, we've partioned a table (using 8.2) by day due to the 50TB of data
> (500k row size, 100G rows) we expect to store it in a year.
> Our performance on inserts and selects against the master table is
> disappointing, 10x slower (with ony 1 partition constraint) than we get by
> going to the partioned table directly. Browsing the list I get the impression
> this just a case of too many partitions? would be better off doing partitions
> of partitions ?
Can you post an "explain analyze" of your query here so we can see what's
going on?
- Luke
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: llonergan@greenplum.com, colin.taylor@gmail.com
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
In-Reply-To: <C1C7A5A9.17730%llonergan@greenplum.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox