Search Postgresql Archives

Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Subject: Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 01:34:05 +1200
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <8c923989-7944-d139-5ade-3d9f2588a11d@gmx.net>
References: <7886a68f-b466-2131-1747-f69f0fb71a37@gmx.net> <69077f15-4125-2d63-733f-21ce6eac4f01@gmx.net> <559b0e40-63e6-fa9a-6b03-d1eba10f30f8@gmx.net> <1629463.1715372568@sss.pgh.pa.us> <6a2f3906-3d7a-6924-7403-8f77d57a18e4@gmx.net> <CAApHDvrtTKfh7HgAyXBd3KN0s-jxiHzW7sWdm-sFEjP6fGPCkg@mail.gmail.com> <3efce60b-48c0-160d-0444-474b02f76739@gmx.net> <8c923989-7944-d139-5ade-3d9f2588a11d@gmx.net>

On Tue, 14 May 2024 at 00:46, Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 May 2024, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 11 May 2024, David Rowley wrote:
> >>  If you look at [1], it says "Tuples changed in partitions and
> >>  inheritance children do not trigger analyze on the parent table."
> >

> Do I read that correctly, that I have to setup cron jobs to manually
> analyze partitioned tables?

It means that auto-analyze won't touch it.  Periodically doing an
ANALYZE on the partitioned table is probably a good idea.

David

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

References:
- SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Tom Lane
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: David Rowley
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou

Prev by Date: Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
Next by Date: Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
Previous by thread: Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
Next by thread: Re: SELECT DISTINCT chooses parallel seqscan instead of indexscan on huge table with 1000 partitions
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Postgresql Jobs] [Postgresql Admin] [Postgresql Performance] [Linux Clusters] [PHP Home] [PHP on Windows] [Kernel Newbies] [PHP Classes] [PHP Databases] [Postgresql & PHP] [Yosemite]