From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | AlexK <alkuzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should I partition this table? |
Date: | 2014-07-10 20:23:11 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1yC69kXgqHJxgQ6pH1FS+0HHW3iLMZUST=av5hXMCQg+g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:36 AM, AlexK <alkuzo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> What would be the advantages of partitioning on ranges of ParentID? Each
> query will touch at most one partition. I might or might not get PK indexes
> one level of depth less.
>
> I understand that I will CLUSTER these smaller tables and benefit from
> that.
> Other than clustering, what are other advantages?
>
If you don't partition, it will take an unacceptably long time to run
CLUSTER on the entire table. If you do partition, you can CLUSTER one
partition at a time, and only need to CLUSTER the fast-changing partitions
more than once. But based on your description, you probably don't need to
run explicit CLUSTERs anyway as your data would end up naturally clustered.
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aram Fingal | 2014-07-10 20:40:28 | invalid connection type "listen_addresses='*' |
Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2014-07-10 20:16:05 | Re: Should I partition this table? |