Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [GENERAL] Question about paritioning - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Alex Samad
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Question about paritioning
Date
Msg-id CAJ+Q1PVNS9TAB2jQka-yrN7+9wSoYf37y_ShgpxFScgq9NSJpA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Question about paritioning  (John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Question about paritioning  (John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>)
List pgsql-general
Tree view
So is date_trunc better than to_char ? I'm thinking it probably is 

as for the number of partitions, well we don't plan on deleting anything, but from my reading as long as the queries stay on a small amount of parts that we should be okay.

A

On 27 July 2017 at 15:33, John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com> wrote:
On 7/26/2017 10:08 PM, Alex Samad wrote:
I have a large table about 3B rows, that I would like to partition on a column called _received which is  of type timestamp


 a good goal is to have no more than about 100 partitions max, and ideally more like 25.

when we partition on time stamp, we typically do it by the week, as we're doing 6 month data retention.

IIRC, we're using DATE_TRUNC('week', timestamp)::DATE  for use as the partition label and key.



--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Krithika Venkatesh
Date:
Subject: [GENERAL] Constraint exclusion involving joins
Next
From: Thore Boedecker
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Developer GUI tools for PostgreSQL