| From: | Hans-Juergen Schoenig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Jeff Cohen <jcohen(at)greenplum(dot)com>, Warren Turkal <turkal(at)google(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)alcove(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Declarative partitioning grammar |
| Date: | 2008-01-15 14:15:56 |
| Message-ID: | F2D5A64C-94CC-4A45-9D2E-6F8D7A6DFD1E@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
>> sure, but this can become really tedious for 1024 partitions,
>
> Well, managing 1024 partitions manually is a tedious job, no matter
> what grammar you take: You'll have to deal with 1024 different
> partition names.
>
> What do you need so many partitions for?
>
imagine a structure which is partitioned by day. if you keep data for
3 years (which is perfectly reasonable) you already have 1000
partitions.
some applications produce so much data that splitting it into days is
perfectly reasonable.
if your get 30 GB a day making monthly tables is not too funny
anymore ...
just think of CREATE INDEX or VACUUM ...
having so many tables is not funny but it can be the only reasonable
choice.
best regards,
hans
--
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
PostgreSQL Solutions and Support
Gröhrmühlgasse 26, 2700 Wiener Neustadt
Tel: +43/1/205 10 35 / 340
www.postgresql.at, www.cybertec.at
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2008-01-15 14:23:53 | Re: SSL over Unix-domain sockets |
| Previous Message | Doug Knight | 2008-01-15 14:09:15 | Re: Tuning Postgresql on Windows XP Pro 32 bit |