From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo(dot)romano(at)notorand(dot)it> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: On Scalability |
Date: | 2010-10-07 21:42:59 |
Message-ID: | 1286487779.2304.372.camel@ebony |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 14:10 +0200, Vincenzo Romano wrote:
> Making these things sub-linear (whether not O(log n) or even O(1) ),
> provided that there's way to, would make this RDBMS more appealing
> to enterprises.
> I mean also partial indexes (as an alternative to table partitioning).
> Being able to effectively cope with "a dozen child tables or so" it's more
> like an amateur feature.
> If you really need partitioning (or just hierarchical stuff) I think you'll need
> for quite more than a dozen items.
> If you partition by just weeks, you'll need 50+ a year.
>
> Is there any precise direction to where look into the code for it?
>
> Is there a way to put this into a wish list?
It's already on the wish list ("TODO") and has been for many years.
We've mostly lacked somebody with the experience and time/funding to
complete that implementation work. I figure I'll be doing it for 9.2
now; it may be difficult to do this for next release.
Theoretically, this can be O(n.log n) for range partitioning and O(1)
for exact value partitioning, though the latter isn't a frequent use
case.
Your conclusion that the current partitioning only works with a dozen or
so items doesn't match the experience of current users however.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-10-07 22:25:36 | Re: Issues with Quorum Commit |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2010-10-07 20:56:14 | Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2010-10-07 21:47:07 | Re: large dataset with write vs read clients |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-10-07 20:40:13 | Re: Odd behaviour with redundant CREATE statement |