Richard Huxton wrote:
> If you've got a web-application then you'll probably want to insert the
> results into a cache table for later use.
If I have quite a bit of activity like this (people selecting 10000 out
of a few million rows and paging through them in a web browser), would
it be good to have a single table with a userid column shared by all
users, or a separate table for each user that can be truncated/dropped?
I started out with one table; but with people doing 10s of thousand
of inserts and deletes per session, I had a pretty hard time figuring
out a reasonable vacuum strategy.
Eventually I started doing a whole bunch of create table tmp_XXXX
tables where XXXX is a userid; and a script to drop these tables - but
that's quite ugly in a different way.
With 8.0 I guess I'll try the single table again - perhaps what I
want may be to always have a I/O throttled vacuum running... hmm.
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Randolf Richardson||Date: 2005-01-20 16:49:55|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft|
|Previous:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2005-01-20 16:44:20|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering|
pgsql-sql by date
|Next:||From: Richard Huxton||Date: 2005-01-20 16:53:14|
|Subject: Re: [SQL] OFFSET impact on Performance???|
|Previous:||From: Michael Fuhr||Date: 2005-01-20 16:48:30|
|Subject: Re: OID's|