From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Yeu <david(dot)yeu(at)skype(dot)net> |
Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "ops(at)groupme(dot)com" <ops(at)groupme(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Performance on large, append-only tables |
Date: | 2012-02-10 15:19:10 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0wVRgMW_cNwhvg51PT=Rb3Cbu0EEs_2t3QfVf1t33gd4g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:03 PM, David Yeu <david(dot)yeu(at)skype(dot)net> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> We've got a pretty large table that sees millions of new rows a day, and
> we're trying our best to optimize queries against it. We're hoping to find
> some guidance on this list.
>
> Thankfully, the types of queries that we perform against this table are
> pretty constrained. We never update rows and we never join against other
> tables. The table essentially looks like this:
>
> | id | group_id | created_at | everything elseŠ
>
> Where `id' is the primary key, auto-incrementing, `group_id' is the
> foreign key that we always scope against, and `created_at' is the
> insertion time. We have indices against the primary key and the group_id.
> Our queries essentially fall into the following cases:
>
> * Š WHERE group_id = ? ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 20;
> * Š WHERE group_id = ? AND id > ? ORDER BY created_at DESC;
> * Š WHERE group_id = ? AND id < ? ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 20;
> * Š WHERE group_id = ? ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 20 OFFSET ?;
>
> In human words, we're looking for:
>
> * The most recent (20) rows.
> * The most recent rows after a given `id'.
> * Twenty rows before a given `id'.
> * Pages of twenty rows.
You can probably significantly optimize this. But first, can we see
some explain analyze for the affected queries?
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Claudio Freire | 2012-02-10 15:33:33 | Re: Performance on large, append-only tables |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-02-10 06:19:52 | Re: timestamp with time zone |