Gaetano,
I have a big table with ~ 10 Milion rows, and is a very
pain administer it, so after years I convinced my self
to partition it and replace the table usage ( only for reading )
with a view.
Now my user_logs table is splitted in 4:
user_logs
user_logs_2002
user_logs_2003
Josh Berkus wrote:
Gaetano,
I have a big table with ~ 10 Milion rows, and is a very
pain administer it, so after years I convinced my self
to partition it and replace the table usage ( only for reading )
with a view.
Now my user_logs table is splitted in 4:
user_logs
user_logs_2002
user_logs_2003
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 02:10:15 +0100, Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why the index usage is lost if used in that way ?
This is how I interpret it (if anyone wants to set me straight or
improve on it feel free)
Views are implemented as rules.
Rules are pretty much just a macro to the
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
The issue here is that the planner is capable of pushing down the WHERE
criteria into the first view, but not into the second, nested view, and so
postgres materializes the UNIONed data set before perfoming the join.
Thing is, I seem to recall that this
