Re: slow dropping of tables, DropRelFileNodeBuffers, tas

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Sergey Koposov <koposov(at)ast(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: slow dropping of tables, DropRelFileNodeBuffers, tas
Date: 2012-06-01 11:51:09
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJUrpMQBZxQtfUZH0OLxWTQjNbQGSppmzw-E=pGwS2ESg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1 June 2012 12:34, Sergey Koposov <koposov(at)ast(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
>>
>> Why do you have 10,000 tables and why is it important to drop them so
>> quickly?
>
>
> 10000 tables are there, because that's the number of partitions. And I'm
> dropping them at the moment, because I'm doing testing. So it won't be
> really crucial for production. But I still thought it was worth reporting.
> Especially when the table dropping took .5 a sec.

Ah, partitions. That explains the long drop time.

Hopefully people don't need to do that too frequently.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Pflug 2012-06-01 12:47:29 Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile
Previous Message Sergey Koposov 2012-06-01 11:39:14 Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile