Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --

From: Markus Schaber <schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Performance List <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --
Date: 2004-09-16 13:38:21
Message-ID: 20040916153821.1d5716ca@kingfisher.intern.logi-track.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Hi, Steve,

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:17:03 -0700
Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 11:16:44AM +0200, Markus Schaber wrote:
> > But you have to add table constraints restricting the time after adding
> > the partition?
> 
> Uhm... unless I'm confused that's not a meaningful thing in this context.
> There's no rule that's putting insertions into an inherited table - the
> decision of which inherited table to insert into is made at application
> level.

I thought of the query optimizer. I thought it could use the table
constraints to drop tables when creating the union. But now I think that
an index gives enough win, because the tree-based indices are rather
quick at returning zero rows when the queried value is out of the
indexed range.

Greetings,
Markus


-- 
markus schaber | dipl. informatiker
logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 zürich
phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53
mailto:schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com | www.logi-track.com

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2004-09-16 15:36:31
Subject: Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --
Previous:From: Mike RylanderDate: 2004-09-16 10:58:32
Subject: Re: Partitioning

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group