Re: Need guidance on partioning

From: Rui DeSousa <rui(dot)desousa(at)icloud(dot)com>
To: M Sarwar <sarwarmd02(at)outlook(dot)com>
Cc: "Wetmore, Matthew (CTR)" <Matthew(dot)Wetmore(at)evernorth(dot)com>, srinivasan s <srinioracledba7(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Need guidance on partioning
Date: 2024-05-23 03:10:09
Message-ID: 2D0CA9B0-A74F-40E3-87EA-89752BBFC347@icloud.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

> On May 22, 2024, at 2:40 PM, M Sarwar <sarwarmd02(at)outlook(dot)com> wrote:
>
> No-one has started complaining about anything so far. I will not be surprising if someone start crying all of sudden.
> My management has highly underestimates the database tasks. I am just listening to them with their priority order. Otherwise, my job will be at risk 🙂

Hi Sarwar,

What you’ll find is that for OLTP systems table sizes doesn’t really matter as access patterns should be well structured and serviced by indexes, etc. The only reason to have partitioning in an OLTP system is for table maintenance; like aging out old data for regulatory reasons, etc.

Partitioning is most beneficial in OLAP and reporting type systems where queries can make use of partition elimination. When thinking about partitioning I also consider the use of Brin indexes as they can sometime achieve similar or even better results. Also, when considering partitioning especially in a hybrid system one should also think about how it will impact referential integrity.

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Harish Harish 2024-05-23 15:14:17 Upgrade from PostgreSQL version 10 to 16
Previous Message Rui DeSousa 2024-05-23 02:42:13 Re: AFTER INSERT trigger INSERT into another table-B are ignoring Table-B constraints