Re: [GENERAL] Slow queries on very big (and partitioned) table - Mailing list pgsql-general

From John R Pierce
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Slow queries on very big (and partitioned) table
Date
Msg-id 3144609e-7dbc-0b77-471e-e13417f8d46a@hogranch.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Slow queries on very big (and partitioned) table  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-general
On 2/20/2017 5:22 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> You probably shouldn't be partitioning by day for such a small dataset,
> unless you've only got a few days worth of data that make up those 800m
> records.

agreed.  we do like 6 months retention by weeks, so there's 26 or so
partitions, that is reasonable.

the primary reason for the partitions is to make it easy to drop old
data by pruning a whole partition.



--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Steven Winfield
Date:
Subject: Re: R: [GENERAL] Slow queries on very big (and partitioned) table
Next
From: Rakesh Kumar
Date:
Subject: [GENERAL] Using xmin and xmax for optimistic locking