Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --

From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --
Date: 2004-09-15 06:15:08
Message-ID: m34qm06osz.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

In the last exciting episode, mail(at)joeconway(dot)com (Joe Conway) wrote:
> That's exactly what we're doing, but using inherited tables instead of
> a union view. With inheritance, there is no need to rebuild the view
> each time a table is added or removed. Basically, in our application,
> tables are partitioned by either month or week, depending on the type
> of data involved, and queries are normally date qualified.

Sounds interesting, and possibly usable.

Where does the constraint come in that'll allow most of the data to be
excluded?

Or is this just that the entries are all part of "bigtable" so that
the self join is only 2-way?
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="acm.org" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;;
http://linuxfinances.info/info/advocacy.html
"Be humble. A lot happened before you were born." - Life's Little
Instruction Book

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Leeuw van der, Tim 2004-09-15 06:51:00 Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres --
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-09-15 06:07:08 Re: disk performance benchmarks