Mike, > Is it practical to partition on the status column and, eg, use triggers to > move a row between the two partitions when status is updated? Any > surprises to watch for, given the status column is actually NULL for active > data and contains a value when archived?
When I've done this before, I've had a setup like the following: 1. One "active" partition 2. Multiple "archive" partitions, also partitioned by time (month or year) 3. stored procedure for archiving a record or records. I'd recommend against triggers because they'll be extremely inefficient if you need to archive a large number of rows at once. Also, (2) only really works if you're going to obsolesce (remove) archive records after a certain period of time. Otherwise the sub-partitioning hurts performance. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
