From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Partitioning by status?
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:24:36 -0800
Message-ID: <4F0F2564.6030702@agliodbs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANPAkgt9mGoF7SyA_n7jX3t6siLGPyA=d1tR2bPwKiAex3bDMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANPAkgt9mGoF7SyA_n7jX3t6siLGPyA=d1tR2bPwKiAex3bDMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mike,
> Is it practical to partition on the status column and, eg, use triggers to
> move a row between the two partitions when status is updated? Any
> surprises to watch for, given the status column is actually NULL for active
> data and contains a value when archived?
When I've done this before, I've had a setup like the following:
1. One "active" partition
2. Multiple "archive" partitions, also partitioned by time (month or year)
3. stored procedure for archiving a record or records.
I'd recommend against triggers because they'll be extremely inefficient
if you need to archive a large number of rows at once.
Also, (2) only really works if you're going to obsolesce (remove)
archive records after a certain period of time. Otherwise the
sub-partitioning hurts performance.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
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: josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Partitioning by status?
In-Reply-To: <4F0F2564.6030702@agliodbs.com>
* 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