-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
> Is it established practice in the Postgres world to separate indexes
> from tables? I would assume that the reasoning of Richard Foote -
> albeit for Oracle databases - is also true for Postgres:
Yes, it's an established practice. I'd call it something just short of
a best practice though, as it really depends on your situation. I'd
take those articles with a grain of salt, as they are very
Oracle-specific (e.g. we do not have fat indexes (yet!), nor segments).
I also find his examples a bit contrived, and the whole "multi-user"
argument irrelevant for common cases. I lean towards using separate
tablespaces in Postgres, as the performance outweighs the additional
complexity. It's down on the tuning list however: much more important
is getting your kernel/volumes configured correctly, allocating
shared_buffers sanely, separating pg_xlog, etc.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201204251304
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iEYEAREDAAYFAk+YL08ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjR0wCfRF0fXpn7C7i5bZ6btDCT3+uX
DU4AoIN3oSwPR+10F1N3jupCj5Dthjfh
=EYGQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
