From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Oliveiros Cristina" <oliveiros(dot)cristina(at)marktest(dot)pt> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Question on partitioning |
Date: | 2008-08-21 16:50:27 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10808210950u91864bcl50b68b0d7b51f02f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Oliveiros Cristina
<oliveiros(dot)cristina(at)marktest(dot)pt> wrote:
> Hello , All.
>
> I am not sure if this is the right mailing list to place this question.
> If it doesn't, please kindly redirect me to the right list.
>
> I have a giant table with about 10,6 million records.
10.6 million rows isn't really gigantic. It's a good size, but unless
you're hitting a lot of the records at once, you should be able to get
pretty good performance if it's indexed properly.
> Queries on it are usually slow, and if I try to do something more elaborate
> like an INNER JOIN with itself it becomes unnacceptably slow.
>
> I am looking for a way to improve performance.
> One of the columns is of type date. Each "day" includes about a few tens of
> thousands records
> And the older a date is the less likely I am to do queries on it.
Well, first let's look at your indexes and if they're being used.
Got an explain analyze output of your slow queries for us to look at?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Roberts | 2008-08-21 18:00:41 | Re: Question on partitioning |
Previous Message | Oliveiros Cristina | 2008-08-21 14:25:14 | Question on partitioning |