Re: Partitioning by status? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From alexandre - aldeia digital
Subject Re: Partitioning by status?
Date
Msg-id 4F100AF1.1020808@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Partitioning by status?  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Partitioning by status?
List pgsql-performance
>
> Also, (2) only really works if you're going to obsolesce (remove)
> archive records after a certain period of time.  Otherwise the
> sub-partitioning hurts performance.
>

Is there any moves to include the "easy" table partitioning in the 9.2
version ?


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?
Next
From: "Anibal David Acosta"
Date:
Subject: auto vacuum, not working?