Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs

Hi Andy,

On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 8:39 PM Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 3:43 PM Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> My point below is a bit off-topic, but I want to share it here. Since
>> we implement a partitioned table in PG with the inherited class, it has much
>> more flexibility than other databases. Like in PG, we allow different partitions
>> have different physical order, different indexes, maybe different index states.
>> that would cause our development work hard in many places and cause some
>> runtime issues as well (like catalog memory usage), have we discussed
>> limiting some flexibility so that we can have better coding/running experience?
>> I want to do some research in this direction, but it would be better that I can
>> listen to any advice from others. More specifically, I want to reduce the memory
>> usage of Partitioned table/index as the first step. In my testing, each IndexOptInfo
>> will use 2kB memory in each backend.
>
>
> As for the compatible issue, will it be ok to introduce a new concept like "
> CREATE TABLE p (a int) partitioned by list(a) RESTRICTED". We can add these
> limitation to restricted partitioned relation only.

I think you'd agree that the topics you want to discuss deserve a
separate discussion thread. You may refer to this discussion in that
new thread if you think that your proposals can solve the problem
being discussed here more generally, which would of course be great.

--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com