Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled?
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
From: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-03-11T02:00:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > PG 11 moved the needle a bit for SELECT queries: > > Excluding unnecessary partitions is slow for UPDATE and DELETE queries, With those words I expect the user might be surprised that it's still slow after doing SET enable_partition_pruning = off; I'm not really talking about constraint exclusion or partition pruning. The memory growth problem the user was experiencing was down to the fact that we plan once per partition and each of the PlannerInfos used for each planner run has a RangeTblEntry for all partitions. This means if you add one more partition and you get N partitions more RangeTblEntry items in memory. This is the quadratic memory growth that I mentioned in the -general post. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Commits
-
Tweak partitioning documentation wording
- 12b9affb32a6 11.0 landed
-
docs: Rework sections on partition pruning/exclusion
- bebc46931a12 11.0 landed
-
Add GUC enable_partition_pruning
- 055fb8d33da6 11.0 landed