Re: PG optimization question - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Craig Ringer
Subject Re: PG optimization question
Date
Msg-id 4B492C4A.2000403@postnewspapers.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to PG optimization question  (Nickolay <nitro@zhukcity.ru>)
List pgsql-performance
On 9/01/2010 6:32 PM, Nickolay wrote:
> Hi 2 all,
>
> Here is my typical configuration: 1(2) GB of RAM, HP ML 350(150) series
> server, SATA raid, Linux.
>
> I have 1 big table (called "archive") which contains short text messages
> with a plenty of additional service info.
> Currently this table contains more than 4M rows for a period of 4,5
> months, i.e. each row has average size of 1K.
>
> I'm going to make our application work with partitions of this table
> instead of one large table. The primary reason is that eventually we'd
> need to remove old rows and it would be pretty hard with one table
> because of blocking (and rows are being added constantly).

DELETEs shouldn't block concurrent INSERTs.

That said, dropping a partition is a lot more convenient than DELETEing
from a big table.

--
Craig Ringer

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Ludwik Dylag
Date:
Subject: Re: PG optimization question
Next
From: Pierre Frédéric Caillaud
Date:
Subject: Re: PG optimization question