Re: Partitioning V schema - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: Partitioning V schema
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1xLzeUty8cw8zka9Ubggcf+cJuqjPpRR-vjkJBnSbCA3Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Partitioning V schema  (Dave Potts <dave.potts@pinan.co.uk>)
Responses Re: Partitioning V schema  (Gregory Haase <haaseg@onefreevoice.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 12:02 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.


I don't think there is much of a choice there.  If you put them in different schemas, then you are inherently partitioning the data.  It just a question of how you name your partitions, which is more of a naming issue than a performance issue.
 

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.

If you partition based on city, then there should be no meaningful difference.  If you partition based on something else, you would have to describe what it is partitioned on, and what your access patterns are like.

Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL SQL Tricks: faster urldecode
Next
From: Marc Mamin
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL SQL Tricks: faster urldecode