On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Sergey Koposov <kopo...@ast.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2012, Jeff Janes wrote: > >> But anyway, is idt_match a fairly static table? If so, I'd partition >> that into 16 tables, and then have each one of your tasks join against >> a different one of those tables. That should relieve the contention >> on the index root block, and might have some other benefits as well. > > > No, idt_match is getting filled by multi-threaded copy() and then joined > with 4 other big tables like idt_phot. The result is then split into > partitions.
That does make things more complicated. But you could you partition it at that level and then do the joins partition-wise? I don't have much experience at data partitioning (well, I do, but the experience is with partitioning in Perl with terabytes of flat files, not in PG :) ) but I think that once you have your partitioning keys you want to apply them the same way up and down the data set. Cheers, Jeff -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
