| From: | Luca Ferrari <fluca1978(at)infinito(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | James David Smith <james(dot)david(dot)smith(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: General 'big data' advice.... |
| Date: | 2013-08-05 13:33:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAKoxK+4CqcBYJiq=2E1PeLwwe6FC+_Hqai6NGYrB6kghpO5ZgA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 1:38 PM, James David Smith
<james(dot)david(dot)smith(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 1) Is PostgreSQL going to be able to cope with this? In terms of the
> table size? I think so...
>
Yes.
> 2) My columns will be something like
> person_id integer,
> person_timestamp timestamp,
> person_location_geom geometry
> Any thoughts on those? The format of the columns?
>
I would think about partitioning data on person_id (ranges) or
person_timestamp (ranges) so to have a few smaller tables than a huge
table.
> 3) I'll probably create a Primary Key which is a combination of
> person_id and person_timestamp. Does this sound like a good idea?
>
Is the same person at different timestamps a different person for your logic?
> 4) Should I use some indexes to improve performance maybe?
It depends on which queries you are going to run, on which is
organized your database (partitioning or not) and other details.
Luca
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Birchall, Austen | 2013-08-05 13:45:44 | Running psql commands from a remote location & pg_hba.conf? |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-08-05 11:59:47 | Re: General 'big data' advice.... |