Re: splitting up tables based on read/write frequency of columns
От | Stefan Keller |
---|---|
Тема | Re: splitting up tables based on read/write frequency of columns |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFcOn29KVFGjp7tJ746i8t7oLuT7px2BHfVkMiRsZrCFVKpmnA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | splitting up tables based on read/write frequency of columns (Jonathan Vanasco <postgres@2xlp.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: splitting up tables based on read/write frequency of columns
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Hi I'm pretty sure PostgreSQL can handle this. But since you asked with a theoretic background, it's probably worthwhile to look at column stores (like [1]). -S. [*] http://citusdata.github.io/cstore_fdw/ 2015-01-19 22:47 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Vanasco <postgres@2xlp.com>: > This is really a theoretical/anecdotal question, as I'm not at a scale yet where this would measurable. I want to investigatewhile this is fresh in my mind... > > I recall reading that unless a row has columns that are TOASTed, an `UPDATE` is essentially an `INSERT + DELETE`, withthe previous row marked for vacuuming. > > A few of my tables have the following characteristics: > - The Primary Key has many other tables/columns that FKEY onto it. > - Many columns (30+) of small data size > - Most columns (90%) are 1 WRITE(UPDATE) for 1000 READS > - Some columns (10%) do a bit of internal bookkeeping and are 1 WRITE(UPDATE) for 50 READS > > Has anyone done testing/benchmarking on potential efficiency/savings by consolidating the frequent UPDATE columns intotheir own table? > > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: