Question on large tables…
When should one consider table partitioning vs. just stuffing 10 million rows
into one table?
I currently have CDR’s that are injected into a table at the rate of over
100,000 a day, which is large.
At some point I’ll want to prune these records out, so being able t
On Dec 27, 2017, at 8:20 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> That's one of the major use cases for partitioning (DROP rather than DELETE
> and
> thus avoiding any following vacuum+analyze).
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/ddl-partitioning.html#DDL-PARTITIONING-OVERVIEW
That’s the plan to
The docs claim that the master table “should” be empty. It it possible to just
create child tables off an existing master table with data, then just inserting
data into the new child tables.
THe plan would be to keep data in the master table and purge it over time until
it’s eventually empty, t
On Dec 30, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> For inheritance (available in and before PG10), the parent may be nonempty,
> which works fine, although someone else might find it unintuitive. (Does the
> doc actually say "should" somewhere ?)
Well it doesn’t say should, but says “normally”
On 4/17/19 6:38 PM, Gunther Schadow wrote:
> So looks like XFS won. I like XFS for its ease of use especially when
> growing.
>
> Any ideas on how ZFS might do? ZFS is of course so much more flexible.
That would totally depend on your data sets and expectations. If you're
doing a LOT of random i
