Re: Postgres (selection of thesis topic) - Mailing list pgsql-general

Good Morning Scott-

The following URL contains the directive to Move Partition in a Partitioned
Tables
http://www.csee.umbc.edu/help/oracle8/server.815/a67772/partiti.htm
you will then need to rebuild the indices to point to the new partition

Is there some manner of automatically rebuilding the indices when moving
partition tables under Postgres?

Thanks/
Martin
This email message and any files transmitted with it contain confidential
information intended only for the person(s) to whom this email message is
addressed.  If you have received this email message in error, please notify
the sender immediately by telephone or email and destroy the original
message without making a copy.  Thank you.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Marlowe" <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com>
To: "Alexander Staubo" <alex@purefiction.net>
Cc: "Harpreet Dhaliwal" <harpreet.dhaliwal01@gmail.com>; "pgsql general"
<pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Postgres (selection of thesis topic)


> On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 08:00, Alexander Staubo wrote:
>> On 5/2/07, Harpreet Dhaliwal <harpreet.dhaliwal01@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I'm kind of new to postgresql and the project that I'm working on
>> > currently
>> > deals with parsing emails, storing parsed components in postgresql DB
>> > and
>> > fire triggers
>> > on certain inserts that opens socket connection with a unix tools
>> > server,
>>
>> Are you sure it is a good idea to do this processing synchronously?
>> What happens if there is a network problem? It sounds like an
>> inefficient and inflexible design.
>>
>> > I have done alot of homework on this and could think of something like
>> > "bulk
>> > of data storage in email parsing and how vacuuming it would increase
>> > the
>> > performance" because i think this vacuum DB concept is not there in
>> > other
>> > RDBMS.
>>
>> SQLite also requires vacuuming, as does other databases based on
>> MVCC-like designs, although some (eg., Oracle with its redo logs,
>> iirc) do their housekeeping behind the scenes.
>
> We're running Oracle 9 here, and it's even worse than vacuuming.  Once a
> table grows, it stays grown until you rebuild it (you use the move
> command, you just don't move it), and if it's filled up it's tablespace,
> you have to extend it to get room to do that.  On top of that, you can't
> move a partitioned table.
>
> I'd say Oracle9 is about 10 times worse than PostgreSQL (any version)
> for the amount of manual maintenance it takes to keep it happy.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>