| From: | Vivek Khera <khera(at)kcilink(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Table partitioning for maximum speed? |
| Date: | 2003-10-10 20:15:43 |
| Message-ID: | x765iwq26o.fsf@yertle.int.kciLink.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
>>>>> "JB" == Jeff Boes <jboes(at)nexcerpt(dot)com> writes:
JB> Will a query against a table of 0.5 million rows beat a query against
JB> a table of 7 million rows by a margin that makes it worth the hassle
JB> of supporting 15 "extra" tables?
I think you'll be better off with a single table, as you won't have
contention for the index pages in the cache.
One thing to do is to reindex reasonably often (for PG < 7.4) to avoid
index bloat, which will make them not fit in cache. Just check the
size of your index in the pg_class table, and when it gets big,
reindex (assuming you do lots of updates/inserts to the table).
Your table splitting solution sounds like something I'd do if I were
forced to use mysql ;-)
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc.
Internet: khera(at)kciLink(dot)com Rockville, MD +1-240-453-8497
AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vivek Khera | 2003-10-10 20:26:58 | Re: go for a script! / ex: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-10-10 20:14:35 | Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing) |