| From: | vinny <vinny(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Large data and slow queries |
| Date: | 2017-04-19 11:22:56 |
| Message-ID: | fa860607f81e5857bf8220862b0389af@xs4all.nl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2017-04-19 09:48, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 4/19/2017 12:31 AM, vinny wrote:
>> Given the number of records, my first thought was either partitioning
>> or partial-indexes.
>> The fewer rows are in the index, the quicker it will be to check,
>> and it's not a lot of work to create separate indexes for lat/long
>> ranges or dates.
>
> that only works if the planner can figure out which partitions to use
> in advance, otherwise it ends up having to scan all the partitions.
>
>
> --
> john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
True, but then again, the proposed queries are quite straight-forward
so I don't expect that to be a problem, really.
Worth a test, if only to see if it helps.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) | 2017-04-19 11:25:04 | Re: Large data and slow queries |
| Previous Message | Samuel Williams | 2017-04-19 10:58:53 | Re: Large data and slow queries |