Hi, Justin. The example link has self-contained DDL to create the partitions (in flat vs composite mode for comparison) and then making the FK's on each showing the marked speed difference for the same net number of partitions (1200 flat vs 80x15 = 1200 composite): https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAE%2BE%3DSQacy6t_3XzCWnY1eiRcNWfz4pp02FER0N7mU_F%2Bo8G_Q%40mail.gmail.com Alec On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 11:59 AM Justin <zzzzz.graf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 5:20 PM Alec Lazarescu <alecl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> "Would probably look at a nested partitioning" >> >> I'm not the original poster, but I have a schema with nested >> (composite) partitions and I do run into some significant >> inefficiencies compared to flat partitions in various schema metadata >> operations (queries to get the list of tables, creating foreign keys, >> etc.) in tables with 1,000+ total partitions. >> >> One example: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAE%2BE%3DSQacy6t_3XzCWnY1eiRcNWfz4pp02FER0N7mU_F%2Bo8G_Q%40mail.gmail.com >> >> Alec >> >> > > Hi Alec, > > would need to see the DDL of the partitions and the queries accessing these partitions to have an opinion > > Thank you > Justin
