On 10/4/21 3:37 PM, Israel Brewster wrote:
>> On Oct 4, 2021, at 1:21 PM, Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com
>> <mailto:robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
>>
>> My "strict" table per station suggestion was meant as an option to
>> avoid the partitioning pain point entirely if it wasn't going to buy
>> you anything. Namely querying more than one station's data.
>
> Ah, so in theory making “strict” tables for each would be easier than
> creating partitions for each? Something to consider for sure if so.
>
>>
>> In a write-once scenario such as this, would a "clustered index" on
>> datetime be stable, performant? Seems a read-for-export could put
>> the head down at time point A and just go?
>>
> That’s beyond my level of DB admin knowledge, unfortunately :) I can
> certainly read up on it and give it a try though!
>
>
I was hoping one of the smart people would chime in;)