On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 at 03:12, Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> > >> partitions 0 100 1000 10000 > >> -------------------------------------------- > >> master 19 1590 2090 128 > >> patched 18 1780 6820 1130 > >> > >> So, that's nice. I wonder why the throughput drops so fast between 1k > >> and 10k partitions, but I'll look into that later. > > > > Those look strange. Why is it so slow with the non-partitioned case? > > I'd have expected that to be the fastest result. > > > > Because there are 1M rows in the table, and it's doing a seqscan.
Of course. My test did the same, but I didn't consider that because I had so few rows per partition. Likely just adding an index would have it make more sense. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
