Can we see the output of \d tablename as well as EXPLAIN ANALYZE of the select? On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 02:48:50PM -0600, Benjamin Krajmalnik wrote: > Actually, right now there is no data in those partitions. > > All of the data is currently in the parent table (I have not yet created > the trigger which will route the data to the correct partition). > > I just found to items intriguing - first, that the indices and other > properties other than the field definition were not inherited (is this > how this is supposed to work?), and second, that PG first retrieves the > entire result set and then limits it (or at least that appear to be how > it is working). > > If the order by clause were an expression, I can understand where it > would have to first retrieve the entire resultset and then limit it. > However, when we are dealing with an order by clause running on an index > or primary key, I would figure that it would only retrieve the number of > rows limited, or if an offset is specified then go to the offset and > only process the "limit" number of rows. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Chris Hoover [mailto:revoohc@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:33 PM > To: Benjamin Krajmalnik > Cc: pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Tale partitioning > > > > Each of the partition tables needs it's own set of indexes. Build them, > and see if the does not fix your performance issues. Also, be sure you > turned on the constraint_exclusion parameter, and each table (other than > the "master") has an constraint on it that is unique. > > HTH, > > Chris > > > > -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
