Re: [Architecture] Multi-Environment pg_cron for Automated Partition Management

From: Jishnu Sygal <jishnu(dot)sygal(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: bertrand HARTWIG <hartwig(dot)bertrand(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Architecture] Multi-Environment pg_cron for Automated Partition Management
Date: 2025-09-17 19:23:14
Message-ID: CAE2yxeO3nvXPJZEANQqGr2xZE7HRXegJFBH2paM6ogWmNc1Qyw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

Hello Bertrand,

Thank you for your response and for sharing your insights. I appreciate the
emphasis on simplicity, stability, and observability, especially given the
low frequency of these jobs.

Your suggestion to consider a thin wrapper in each database as an
alternative to relying heavily on dblink across environments is very
practical. I will definitely look into how that could work and if it can
still provide the unified API we are aiming for without the potential
pitfalls you have encountered.

Thanks again for the valuable input.

Regards,
Jishnu

On Wed, 17 Sept, 2025, 8:27 pm bertrand HARTWIG, <hartwig(dot)bertrand(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> Hello*,*
>
> Interesting proposal — thanks for sharing so much context!
>
> From my perspective, *I’d encourage you to* *keep it simple.* pg_partman
> jobs are relatively low frequency, which makes monitoring and reliability
> more important than architectural elegance.
>
> Relying on pg_cron + dblink across multiple environments adds complexity
> and risks (connection leaks, security management, debugging difficulties).
>
> If you really want a universal SQL API, consider a *thin wrapper* in each
> database that can be triggered externally, rather than a cross-db dblink
> layer.
>
> My 2 cents: stability and observability usually win over architectural
> purity in the long run.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bertrand
>
> *PS: Full disclosure — I’ve had way too many bad adventures with dblink,
> so maybe I’m a bit biased!*
>
>
> Le 17 sept. 2025 à 17:04, Jishnu Sygal <jishnu(dot)sygal(at)gmail(dot)com> a écrit :
>
> Hello Postgres Community,
>
> I am writing to get your expert opinion on a proposed architecture for
> managing pg_partman automated partitioning across a multi-environment
> PostgreSQL setup. While this solution is primarily for cost savings and is
> used in our non-production environments, *stability is a must*. Our core
> goal is to create a universal scheduling solution that works identically
> across cloud-managed databases (AWS RDS, Google Cloud SQL, Azure Database),
> as well as on-premises shared and dedicated hosts.
> Business Context & Core Requirements
>
> We need to consistently automate pg_partman maintenance tasks across our
> PostgreSQL 17 environments. The primary challenge is maintaining a single,
> identical application interface so that the same SQL commands work without
> modification, regardless of the deployment model. A key requirement is that
> our in-house database schema migration tools will be used to roll out SQL
> scripts that directly handle job maintenance and alterations during
> releases. Our jobs are low frequency (monthly/quarterly/annually) but are
> critically important, as failures can cause serious operational issues.
>
> Our current constraints include:
>
> -
>
> PostgreSQL 17 (with a planned migration to 18).
> -
>
> A mix of AWS RDS, Google Cloud SQL, Azure Database, and on-premises
> deployments.
> -
>
> Shared hosts with 50-60 databases and dedicated hosts with a single
> database.
>
> Our Proposed Architecture
>
> As the pg_cron extension requires a dedicated database to schedule jobs
> for other databases, we have designed an abstraction layer to address our
> multi-environment challenges. Our architecture places pg_cron in a
> designated database and uses dblink to execute partition maintenance jobs
> in the target application databases.
>
> Key elements of this design are:
>
> -
>
> *Universal API Layer:* Every application database would have an
> identical cron schema with wrapper functions.
> -
>
> *Identical Application Interface:* Applications use the exact same SQL
> statement, for example: SELECT
> cron.schedule('monthly_partition_maintenance', '0 2 1 * *', 'SELECT
> partman.run_maintenance_proc()');
> -
>
> *Environment-Adaptive Communication:* dblink is used for
> multi-database environments, while direct calls are used for
> single-database setups.
> -
>
> *PostgreSQL 18 Future-Proofing:* We plan to leverage SCRAM
> pass-through authentication for dblink to eliminate the need for
> storing credentials.
>
> Technical Questions & Concerns
>
> We have detailed several technical questions below and would greatly
> appreciate your insights and validation.
>
> *1. Architecture Validation*
>
> -
>
> Is this universal abstraction layer a sound architectural pattern for
> managing pg_partman across diverse environments, especially given our
> focus on using in-house tools for job management?
> -
>
> How should the architecture specifically adapt for AWS RDS vs. Google
> Cloud SQL vs. Azure Database, especially concerning their limitations on
> pg_cron or connection management?
> -
>
> Does this design scale appropriately from a single dedicated database
> to a shared host with 50-60 databases and 400-900 partition jobs?
>
> *2. Connection & Performance*
>
> -
>
> Is our proposed temporary-connection-with-guaranteed-cleanup pattern
> robust enough for production? We are concerned about dblink connection
> exhaustion risks and connection leaks, especially in shared environments
> with many jobs.
> -
>
> Given the low frequency of jobs, will the dblink overhead be
> significant? Are there specific performance optimizations we should
> consider for cloud-managed services vs. on-premises?
>
> *3. Alternative Approaches*
>
> -
>
> Should we abandon this PostgreSQL-native approach and instead consider
> cloud-native job schedulers (e.g, AWS EventBridge, Google Cloud
> Scheduler, Azure Logic Apps) to trigger maintenance jobs?
> -
>
> Are there existing enterprise scheduling solutions that are
> purpose-built for this kind of multi-cloud, on-premises PostgreSQL
> automation?
>
> We are most concerned about connection leaks, unnoticed maintenance
> failures, and ensuring a single, identical SQL interface is truly
> achievable. We believe this solution could significantly simplify our
> operations, but we want to validate its viability and get feedback on
> potential pitfalls from the community.
>
> Thank you for your time and any insights you can provide.
> Best Regards,
> Jishnu Sygal
>
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Muhammet Kurtoğlu 2025-09-18 12:11:37 Upgrading from postgresql 11 to postgresql 17 using pg_upgrade
Previous Message bertrand HARTWIG 2025-09-17 18:26:49 Re: [Architecture] Multi-Environment pg_cron for Automated Partition Management