Re: [POC] hash partitioning

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>
Cc: amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [POC] hash partitioning
Date: 2017-09-14 16:05:16
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZq0dsC6s+5cSXkRJ86UPDR1pfVAkXQV7K_dv+BpWK-0w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Jesper Pedersen
<jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com> wrote:
> When I do
>
> CREATE TABLE mytab (
> a integer NOT NULL,
> b integer NOT NULL,
> c integer,
> d integer
> ) PARTITION BY HASH (b);
>
> and create 64 partitions;
>
> CREATE TABLE mytab_p00 PARTITION OF mytab FOR VALUES WITH (MODULUS 64,
> REMAINDER 0);
> ...
> CREATE TABLE mytab_p63 PARTITION OF mytab FOR VALUES WITH (MODULUS 64,
> REMAINDER 63);
>
> and associated indexes
>
> CREATE INDEX idx_p00 ON mytab_p00 USING btree (b, a);
> ...
> CREATE INDEX idx_p63 ON mytab_p63 USING btree (b, a);
>
> Populate the database, and do ANALYZE.
>
> Given
>
> EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, VERBOSE, BUFFERS ON) SELECT a, b, c, d FROM mytab WHERE b
> = 42
>
> gives
>
> Append
> -> Index Scan using idx_p00 (cost rows=7) (actual rows=0)
> ...
> -> Index Scan using idx_p63 (cost rows=7) (actual rows=0)
>
> E.g. all partitions are being scanned. Of course one partition will contain
> the rows I'm looking for.

Yeah, we need Amit Langote's work in
http://postgr.es/m/098b9c71-1915-1a2a-8d52-1a7a50ce79e8@lab.ntt.co.jp
to land and this patch to be adapted to make use of it. I think
that's the major thing still standing in the way of this. Concerns
were also raised about not having a way to see the hash function, but
we fixed that in 81c5e46c490e2426db243eada186995da5bb0ba7 and
hopefully this patch has been updated to use a seed (I haven't looked
yet). And there was a concern about hash functions not being
portable, but the conclusion of that was basically that most people
think --load-via-partition-root will be a satisfactory workaround for
cases where that becomes a problem (cf. commit
23d7680d04b958de327be96ffdde8f024140d50e). So this is the major
remaining issue that I know about.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-09-14 16:09:23 pgsql: Fix bool/int type confusion
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-09-14 15:59:04 Re: Optimise default partition scanning while adding new partition