Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11889632967 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:31:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51008-09 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:31:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx.ttitech.net (mx.ttitech.net [65.202.253.91]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142A16326BC for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:31:28 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [172.30.249.253] (tti88 [65.202.253.88]) by mx.ttitech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DBE44683F6 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:31:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4C23B28C.2080006@ttitech.net> Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:31:24 -0400 From: Joshua Gooding User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: question about partitioning References: <4C235807.5070509@ttitech.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.011 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_40=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201006/79 X-Sequence-Number: 34270 I think I replied to the individual and not to the list before.... As of right now size doesn't matter, I need to partition it via a date. 10 partitions, 10 weeks worth of data. I was thinking of partitioning it off every 32GB of data, but that is not exactly what I am looking to do. Joshua Gooding On 6/24/2010 11:06 AM, Jasen Betts wrote: > On 2010-06-24, Joshua Gooding wrote: > >> Right now I am in the process of migrating an Oracle DB over to Postgres >> 8.4.3. The table is partitioned by size. Is there anyway to partition >> the new postgres table by size? I created some partitions for the new >> table, but I didn't give postgres any rules to partition by, so I have >> 250M test records in one table. Any ideas or thoughts on how to build >> the rules for the table by size would be greatly appreciated. >> > by size of what? > >