Re: What needs to be done for real Partitioning?

"Stacy White" <harsh(at)computer(dot)org> writes:
> FWIW, we see large benefits from partitioning other than the ability to
> easily drop data, for example:

> - We can vacuum only the active portions of a table
> - Postgres automatically keeps related records clustered together on disk,
> which makes it more likely that the blocks used by common queries can be
> found in cache
> - The query engine uses full table scans on the relevant sections of data,
> and quickly skips over the irrelevant sections
> - 'CLUSTER'ing a single partition is likely to be significantly more
> performant than clustering a large table

Global indexes would seriously reduce the performance of both vacuum and
cluster for a single partition, and if you want seq scans you don't need
an index for that at all. So the above doesn't strike me as a strong
argument for global indexes ...

regards, tom lane