Re: Schemas vs partitioning vs multiple databases for archiving - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: Schemas vs partitioning vs multiple databases for archiving
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1yAtWYgoMU3kZJLNdO8px2SyFBVnsL35iP2Cbq5yZqh2g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Schemas vs partitioning vs multiple databases for archiving  (Bartel Viljoen <bartel@ncc.co.za>)
List pgsql-general
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Bartel Viljoen <bartel@ncc.co.za> wrote:

Dear mailing list.

 

My current application make use of partitioning by creating a new child table which holds transaction records for every month. I’ve notice that after a couple of months depending on the hardware at some of our clients the inserts become very slow. The reason memory.


How do you know that memory is the reason?  What behavior or monitoring-tool output are you seeing that leads you to that conclusion?

 

I don’t want to delete old child tables even though they may be queried seldom



If you did delete the old child tables, would it solve the problem?  If the problem is showing up specifically on inserts, and the inserts are happening directly into the leading-edge partition, then older child tables shouldn't have anything to do with it.

Cheers,

Jeff

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Schemas vs partitioning vs multiple databases for archiving
Next
From: Jasen Betts
Date:
Subject: Re: Alternatives to very large tables with many performance-killing indicies?