Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> writes: > On 26.06.2013 11:17, Yuri Levinsky wrote: >> When you dealing with company, which has >> ~350.000.000 users, and you don't want to use key/value data stores: you >> need hash partitioned tables and hash partitioned table clusters to >> perform fast search and 4-6 tables join based on user phone number for >> example.
> B-trees are surprisingly fast for key-value lookups. There is no reason > to believe that a hash partitioned table would be faster for that than a > plain table. Or in short: the quoted advice may very well be true for Oracle, but applying it blindly to Postgres is not a good idea. PG's performance characteristics are a lot different, especially in the area of partitioned tables. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers