Yeah that would be a pain to have the date_part in each query. Thanks for the
info!
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 00:48:10 -0700
From: ml-node+s1045698n5884581...@n5.nabble.com
To: ri...@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Postgres partitions-query scanning all child tables
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 1:10 AM, rverghese <[hidden email]> wrote:
Ok, thanks. Thats a bummer though. That means I need a table for every
month/year combination. I was hoping to limit it to 12 tables.
Riya
If you wanted to have a column called month_num or something like that, and if
*all* of your queries extract the month date_part() in every where clause, then
yes, you could have just 12 tables.
But you won't like that partitioning scheme for other reasons:- queries that
don't "play by the rules" will be slow- very old data will slow down recent-day
queries- no ability to quickly remove obsolete data by dropping partitions that
are no longer useful
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the
discussion below:
http://postgresql.nabble.com/Postgres-partitions-query-scanning-all-child-tables-tp5884497p5884581.html
To unsubscribe from Postgres partitions-query scanning all
child tables, click here.
NAML
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.nabble.com/Postgres-partitions-query-scanning-all-child-tables-tp5884497p5884729.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
