On 08-11-2013 05:07, Jan Lentfer wrote:
> For the case where you have tables of varying size this would lead to
> a reduced overall processing time as it prevents large (read: long
> processing time) tables to be processed in the last step. While
> processing large tables at first and filling up "processing
> slots/jobs" when they get free with smaller tables one after the
> other would safe overall execution time.
>
That is certainly a good strategy (not the optimal [1] -- that is hard
to achieve). Also, the strategy must:
(i) consider the relation age before size (for vacuum);
(ii) consider that you can't pick indexes for the same relation (for
reindex).
[1]
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmobwxqsagXKtyQ1S8+gMpqxF_MLXv=4350tFZVqAwKEqgQ@mail.gmail.com
-- Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento,
Suporte24x7 e Treinamento
