From: Jim C. Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
To: Steven Flatt <steven.flatt@gmail.com>
Cc: Colin Taylor <colin.taylor@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 14:24:42 -0600
Message-ID: <20070110202442.GV12217@nasby.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <357fa7590701081202p726c049ej61390dd1816d1369@mail.gmail.com>
References: <84d3067d0701062037k3229c9ddjbde73b1fd79ee209@mail.gmail.com>
<357fa7590701081202p726c049ej61390dd1816d1369@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 03:02:24PM -0500, Steven Flatt wrote:
> We use partitioned tables extensively and we have observed linear
> performance degradation on inserts as the number of rules on the master
> table grows (i.e. number of rules = number of partitions). We had to come
> up with a solution that didn't have a rule per partition on the master
> table. Just wondering if you are observing the same thing.
Except for the simplest partitioning cases, you'll be much better off
using a trigger on the parent table to direct inserts/updates/deletes to
the children. As a bonus, using a trigger makes it a lot more realistic
to deal with an update moving data between partitions.
--
Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: jim@nasby.net, steven.flatt@gmail.com, colin.taylor@gmail.com
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
In-Reply-To: <20070110202442.GV12217@nasby.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox