Message-ID: <4B487D9C.9020507@zhukcity.ru>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 15:59:08 +0300
From: Nickolay <nitro@zhukcity.ru>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kenneth Marshall <ktm@rice.edu>
CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PG optimization question
References: <4B485975.70506@zhukcity.ru>
	<2f4958ff1001090418i78dee992t5ff2d78a54187c07@mail.gmail.com>
	<4B4879A0.2060703@zhukcity.ru>
	<20100109124646.GA8123@it.is.rice.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20100109124646.GA8123@it.is.rice.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

That may help with the queries speed (not a problem now), but we'll then 
have to add UNION statement for daily staging table for other 5% of 
requests, right? And there would be a moment when daily message is in 
archive table AND in daily table (while transferring from daily table to 
archive).
Our main problem is in blocking when doing DELETE (app sometimes freezes 
for a long time), and also we have to do VACUUM on live table, which is 
not acceptable in our app.

Thanks for your reply, I was kinda worried about number of partitions 
and how this would affect PG query execution speed.

Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>> Oh, btw, 95% of queries are searching rows for current date (last 24 
>> hours).
>>     
>
> You may want to use a daily staging table and then flush to the 
> monthly archive tables at the end of the day.
>
>