Re: Performance issue after creating partitions - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Performance issue after creating partitions
Date
Msg-id 3757070.1661895637@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Performance issue after creating partitions  (Teja Jakkidi <teja.jakkidi05@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Performance issue after creating partitions  (Doug Reynolds <mav@wastegate.net>)
List pgsql-admin
Teja Jakkidi <teja.jakkidi05@gmail.com> writes:
> Anyone ever encountered the below situation as what I am noticing with partitions?

You haven't shown us your query, so any answer would be blind speculation.

However, in the spirit of blind speculation, I'm wondering if you're
expecting those range constraints to propagate across a join.  They
won't; you'd need to duplicate the conditions for the other table.

That is, if you have WHERE+JOIN/ON conditions amounting to

    WHERE a.a = b.b AND b.b = constant

the planner is able to derive "a.a = constant" on the assumption of
transitivity, and use that to constrain the scan of table a (ie,
use an index, reject partitions at plan time, etc).  But no such
deduction happens for

    WHERE a.a = b.b AND b.b >= constant

If you want a constrained scan of a, you need to write it out:

    WHERE a.a = b.b AND b.b >= constant AND a.a >= constant

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Teja Jakkidi
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance issue after creating partitions
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding more detail to pg_upgrade documentation