From: | Markus Schaber <schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Performance List <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres -- |
Date: | 2004-09-16 13:38:21 |
Message-ID: | 20040916153821.1d5716ca@kingfisher.intern.logi-track.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi, Steve,
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:17:03 -0700
Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 11:16:44AM +0200, Markus Schaber wrote:
> > But you have to add table constraints restricting the time after adding
> > the partition?
>
> Uhm... unless I'm confused that's not a meaningful thing in this context.
> There's no rule that's putting insertions into an inherited table - the
> decision of which inherited table to insert into is made at application
> level.
I thought of the query optimizer. I thought it could use the table
constraints to drop tables when creating the union. But now I think that
an index gives enough win, because the tree-based indices are rather
quick at returning zero rows when the queried value is out of the
indexed range.
Greetings,
Markus
--
markus schaber | dipl. informatiker
logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 zürich
phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53
mailto:schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com | www.logi-track.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joe Conway | 2004-09-16 15:36:31 | Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres -- |
Previous Message | Mike Rylander | 2004-09-16 10:58:32 | Re: Partitioning |