| From: | alexandre - aldeia digital <adaldeia(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Partitioning by status? |
| Date: | 2012-01-23 17:22:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4F1D976B.4040108@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Em 13-01-2012 17:05, Josh Berkus escreveu:
> On 1/13/12 2:44 AM, alexandre - aldeia digital wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, (2) only really works if you're going to obsolesce (remove)
>>> archive records after a certain period of time. Otherwise the
>>> sub-partitioning hurts performance.
>>>
>>
>> Is there any moves to include the "easy" table partitioning in the 9.2
>> version ?
>
> Nobody has been submitting patches.
>
I'm sorry hear this. Table partitioning is a very good helper in a large
number of performance issues. If there was a bounty to help anyone to
make this, I would be a happy contributor. :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | alexandre - aldeia digital | 2012-01-23 17:26:47 | Re: Discovering the most searched values for a field |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-01-23 17:03:17 | Re: spikes in pgbench read-only results |