Re: Hash partitioning.

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@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