Re: table partioning performance

From: "Steven Flatt" <steven(dot)flatt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Colin Taylor" <colin(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
Date: 2007-01-10 21:00:00
Message-ID: 357fa7590701101300m2812545k1487ca58e97970ed@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On 1/9/07, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> If you are doing date range partitioning it should be fairly simple to
> load data into the latest table directly. That was the way I originally
> intended for it to be used. The rules approach isn't something I'd
> recommend as a bulk loading option and its a lot more complex anyway.
>
The problem we have with blindly loading all data into the latest table is
that some data (< 5%, possibly even much less) is actually delivered "late"
and belongs in earlier partitions. So we still needed the ability to send
data to an arbitrary partition.

Steve

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steven Flatt 2007-01-10 21:39:06 Re: table partioning performance
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2007-01-10 20:24:42 Re: table partioning performance

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2007-01-10 21:09:31 Re: Partitioning
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2007-01-10 20:45:31 Re: Performance of PostgreSQL on Windows vs Linux