Re: PG optimization question

From: Nickolay <nitro(at)zhukcity(dot)ru>
To: Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG optimization question
Date: 2010-01-09 12:59:08
Message-ID: 4B487D9C.9020507@zhukcity.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

That may help with the queries speed (not a problem now), but we'll then
have to add UNION statement for daily staging table for other 5% of
requests, right? And there would be a moment when daily message is in
archive table AND in daily table (while transferring from daily table to
archive).
Our main problem is in blocking when doing DELETE (app sometimes freezes
for a long time), and also we have to do VACUUM on live table, which is
not acceptable in our app.

Thanks for your reply, I was kinda worried about number of partitions
and how this would affect PG query execution speed.

Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>> Oh, btw, 95% of queries are searching rows for current date (last 24
>> hours).
>>
>
> You may want to use a daily staging table and then flush to the
> monthly archive tables at the end of the day.
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pierre Frédéric Caillaud 2010-01-09 15:37:29 Re: PG optimization question
Previous Message Lefteris 2010-01-09 12:52:31 Re: Joint index including MAX() ?