From: | Arya F <arya6000(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Best partition type for billions of addresses |
Date: | 2020-05-02 14:33:47 |
Message-ID: | CAFoK1awNHv2SB2F2bFGkCgZTa9YvBBKJ83yrWvyXvAARNhtzWw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> * Arya F (arya6000(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> > I need to store about 600 million rows of property addresses across
> > multiple counties. I need to have partitioning setup on the table as
> > there will be updates and inserts performed to the table frequently
> > and I want the queries to have good performance.
>
> That's not what partitioning is for, and 600m rows isn't all *that*
> many.
>
But I have noticed that my updates and inserts have slowed down
dramatically when I started going over about 20 million rows and the
reason was because every time it has to update the index. When I
removed the index, my insert performance stayed good no matter the
size of the table.
So I should be able to achieve good performance with just one
partition? Maybe I just need to get hardware with more memory?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2020-05-02 14:39:24 | Re: Best partition type for billions of addresses |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2020-05-02 14:01:09 | Re: Best partition type for billions of addresses |