Re: Scaling PostgreSQL-9

From: Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Scaling PostgreSQL-9
Date: 2010-09-28 13:39:53
Message-ID: AANLkTikDsYVtoQt2GEjqiCcD8na97o2esONa+63jJUQX@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Sandy <sandy9940(at)rediffmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Table has mobile number,status and expiry date. I can not partition on
> expiry date as all SELECT's are on mobile number.
>

Then partition on the mobile number. If your updates and queries are all
tied to that, then it is the ideal candidate.

You should also make sure that you have proper indexes on each partition to
let the query executer quickly decide that a given table is not of any use
(you really don't want sequence scan on each partition).

You will get speedups if you can achieve one or both of getting the query
panner to use the constraint exclusions to eliminate partitions and getting
the index scans to quickly skip over partitions which will not have the data
you want.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2010-09-28 14:26:29 Re: Implicit CAST is not working in Postgresql 8.4
Previous Message Sandy 2010-09-28 12:56:29 Re: Re: [GENERAL] Scaling PostgreSQL-9