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

Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps

From: Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps
Date: 2008-01-04 12:39:42
Message-ID: 477E290E.2040100@bluegap.ch (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi,

Simon Riggs wrote:
> - any Fact table where measurements/observations/events are accumulated
> e.g.
> Web Hits (any Internet events)
> Call Detail Records
> Sales
> Security Events
> Scientific Measurements
> Process Control
> 
> - any Major Entity where new entities are created from a sequence
> e.g.
> Orders, OrderItems
> Invoices
> Shipments, Returns
> most SCM/DCM events

...and only changed very seldom after a while, I would add. Because 
changing an old tuple would invalidate the optimization for the affected 
segment.

That's why this optimization can't help for inventory tables, where an 
id might correlate with time and storage location, but writing access 
doesn't correlate with storage location (segment number) and time.

Regards

Markus

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Markus SchiltknechtDate: 2008-01-04 12:49:27
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps
Previous:From: Markus SchiltknechtDate: 2008-01-04 12:29:55
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps

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