BTW, I should have mentioned that partitioning is a very new feature and that folks probably would like to know about shortcommings you find while using it.
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 11:40:51AM -0700, Sriram Dandapani wrote: > Thanks...looks like partitioning will help. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Nasby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 11:37 AM > To: Sriram Dandapani > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ADMIN] Tale partitioning > > Please include the mailing list in your replies so others can provide > input. > > > From: Sriram Dandapani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Most of our reports use a order by limit X...The rowcount in > > some tables > > are > 200 million. (and the table size is about 50-100gb) > > > > Does the fact that constraint_exclusion doesn't deal with order by > > /limit > > makes partitioning an unwise choice. > > Well, in a worst-case scenario, partitioning will perform no worse than > if you had one giant table. So it's not hurting you, it may just not be > helping you. > > > What if the main query does just an order by and an outer query wraps > > the inner query with a limit.. > > It all depends on if the order-by code is partitioning aware, and I'm > not sure that it is. But if you index on the appropriate column it > should hopefully make use of that... > > > I am trying to figure out if I should use partitioning or not (my goal > > is two-fold..purge lots of data in aged tables and make queries > > partition-aware) > > Well, reason #1 sounds like plenty of justification for using > partitioning to me. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
