Re: Query-plan for partitioned UPDATE/DELETE slow and swaps vmem compared to SELECT

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: John Papandriopoulos <dr(dot)jpap(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Query-plan for partitioned UPDATE/DELETE slow and swaps vmem compared to SELECT
Date: 2010-12-04 16:42:03
Message-ID: 23792.1291480923@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

John Papandriopoulos <dr(dot)jpap(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I've recreated the same example with just one parent table, and 4096 child tables.

> SELECT query planning is lightning fast as before; DELETE and UPDATE cause my machine to swap.

> What's different about DELETE and UPDATE here?

Hmm. Rules? Triggers? You seem to be assuming the problem is at the
planner stage but I'm not sure you've proven that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-12-04 16:59:58 Re: problem with from_collapse_limit and joined views
Previous Message Віталій Тимчишин 2010-12-04 15:32:16 Re: Slow query to get last created row using CURRVAL