Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Rod Taylor" <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>
Cc: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, "Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
Date: 2006-06-22 17:42:47
Message-ID: 36e682920606221042v2a321189p9ffc79abea14c77a@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 6/22/06, Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> wrote:
> If you INSERT into multiple partitions (by time -- say one per minute)
> and TRUNCATE periodically (30 minute old partitions for 30 minute
> expiry) it works much better. Expiring the session is quite fast as well
> since they'll go away with the truncate.

Forgive me if this sounds rude because I'm not meaning it as such, but
this suggestion sounds like a MySQL-ish hack. No doubt it would work,
but should an application-writer have to incur the cost of writing
something different because the database can't handle it? I remember
having to write subselect code in PHP because MySQL couldn't do it...
not what I would call a *solution* by any mean.

--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2006-06-22 17:48:06 Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2006-06-22 17:42:42 Re: let's meet