Re: index sizes: single table vs partitioned - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: index sizes: single table vs partitioned
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobWEVjmLOAhg6B-zButGYeqTp67L6OzFuHQryWETeZhoQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to index sizes: single table vs partitioned  (Andrew Hammond <andrew.george.hammond@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Andrew Hammond
<andrew.george.hammond@gmail.com> wrote:
> For a large table, should there be a difference in index sizes between a
> single table representation and representation based on multiple partitions
> with identical indexes?

This isn't really the right mailing list for this question; this is a
mailing list for the development team.  I would suggest trying this on-general.

I wouldn't expect there to be a big difference, but your email is
light on the sort of details that might enable someone to speculate on
what is going on in your particular case.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Enforcing that all WAL has been replayed after restoring from backup
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Enforcing that all WAL has been replayed after restoring from backup