From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Naresh Soni <jmnaresh(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hi Community |
Date: | 2015-02-03 15:58:53 |
Message-ID: | CAOR=d=2vTYb8AkZmjp+vLtAezPdXqgmoj8Gihbnv7=P8J3+hGQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:14 PM, Naresh Soni <jmnaresh(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> This is only 1 table in the database which will have such huge data i.e 1
> million data per day . no doubt there are other tables in the database but
> the records are limited.
>> Can the data be easily partitioned? For example, can you set up child
>> tables by month for query and archive efficiency?
>>
> Don't think so.
>>
>> What sort of query mix do you anticipate? What portion of inserts,
>> updates, selects,...? Lots of data-warehouse type queries?
>>
> Yes, there will be complex queries as this table will be used for reporting
> purpose. In short this table will contain Financial Invoices.
>>
>> Is the schema fairly simple or are there lots of complex foreign-key
>> constraints?
>
> This table has 1 primary and 15 foreign key constraints.
I would tend to question your db design here. This layout is setting
off alarms for me. It sounds like a "garbage pail" table where you
just chuck a bunch of semi-related material without a proper schema
for it. That's a recipe for disaster.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Luis Antonio Dias de Sá Junior | 2015-02-03 16:53:24 | BDR and Load Balance |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-02-03 15:35:24 | Re: Estimating the execution cost of a query in a partitioned schema: Weird execution plans and totally wrong execution costs (pg_class and pg_statistic) |