Re: Partitioning V schema - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Agustin Larreinegabe
Subject Re: Partitioning V schema
Date
Msg-id CALQFU69pe-KgsVLB5UQ_t5-fBhW3HeodjWqETQSA06bPfQuX2Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Partitioning V schema  (Dave Potts <dave.potts@pinan.co.uk>)
List pgsql-general
If I were you I will use partitioning. In my experience, partitioning is easier and transparent. I just have to set it up and then refers just to one table and done.
About speed, if you have the value "constraint_exclusion" = partition, postgres will examine constraints only for inheritance child tables and UNION ALL subqueries and will improve the perfomance of your query



On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:02 AM, Dave Potts <dave.potts@pinan.co.uk> wrote:
Hi List

I am looking for some general advice about the best was of splitting  a large data table,I have  2 different choices, partitioning or different schemas.

The data table refers to the number of houses that can be include in a city, as such there are large number of records.


I am wondering if decided to partition the table if the update speed/access might be faster that just declaring a different schema per city.

Under the partition the data table would appear to be smaller, so I should get an increase in speed, but the database still have to do some sort of indexing.

If I used different schemas, it resolves data protection issues, but doing a backup might become a nightmare

In general which is the fast access method?

regards


Dave.





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



--
Gracias
-----------------
Agustín Larreinegabe

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Adam C Falkenberg
Date:
Subject: Re: Using ODBC and VBA to pull data from a large object
Next
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: reading cvs logs with pgadmin queries