Re: Why do I need more time with partition table? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jan Otto
Subject Re: Why do I need more time with partition table?
Date
Msg-id 4B0544A0-9DE5-4BF5-9FCB-45AB5738F390@me.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Why do I need more time with partition table?  (AI Rumman <rummandba@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Why do I need more time with partition table?
List pgsql-performance
hi al,

> With Parition :-
>
>
> explain analyze
> select *
> from table1  as c
> inner join table2 as a on c.crmid = a.table2id and deleted = 0
> where module ='Leads';
>                                                                                 QUERY PLAN
                                                    
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Hash Join  (cost=108101.50..175252.57 rows=313256 width=506) (actual time=8430.588..8430.588 rows=0 loops=1)
>    Hash Cond: (a.table2id = c.crmid)
>    ->  Seq Scan on table2 a  (cost=0.00..18337.34 rows=681434 width=139) (actual time=0.054..870.554 rows=681434
loops=1)
>    ->  Hash  (cost=89195.80..89195.80 rows=313256 width=367) (actual time=2751.950..2751.950 rows=287365 loops=1)
>          Buckets: 1024  Batches: 128  Memory Usage: 226kB
>          ->  Append  (cost=0.00..89195.80 rows=313256 width=367) (actual time=0.034..2304.191 rows=287365 loops=1)
>                ->  Seq Scan on table1 c  (cost=0.00..89187.53 rows=313255 width=367) (actual time=0.032..1783.075
rows=287365loops=1) 
>                      Filter: ((deleted = 0) AND ((module)::text = 'Leads'::text))
>                ->  Index Scan using table1_leads_deleted_idx on table1_leads c  (cost=0.00..8.27 rows=1 width=280)
(actualtime=0.010..0.010 rows=0 loops=1) 
>                      Index Cond: (deleted = 0)
>                      Filter: ((module)::text = 'Leads'::text)
>  Total runtime: 8432.024 ms
> (12 rows)
>
> I set constraint_exclusion to partition.
>
> Why do I need more time with parition?

it looks like you don't moved your data from base-table to your partitions.

regards, jan


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: AI Rumman
Date:
Subject: Re: Why do I need more time with partition table?
Next
From: Laszlo Nagy
Date:
Subject: ZFS vs. UFS