Re: Partitioning by status?

From: alexandre - aldeia digital <adaldeia(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Partitioning by status?
Date: 2012-01-13 10:44:01
Message-ID: 4F100AF1.1020808@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

>
> Also, (2) only really works if you're going to obsolesce (remove)
> archive records after a certain period of time. Otherwise the
> sub-partitioning hurts performance.
>

Is there any moves to include the "easy" table partitioning in the 9.2
version ?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Anibal David Acosta 2012-01-13 12:08:36 auto vacuum, not working?
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2012-01-12 23:17:22 wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?