Re: Table partitioning for maximum speed?

I was replying to the general comment that PG cannot profit from having
patitioned tables.

Vivek Khera wrote:
>
> >>>>> "JL" == Jean-Luc Lachance <jllachan(at)nsd(dot)ca> writes:
>
> JL> BULL.
> JL> How many times does PG have to scan the whole table because of MVCC?
> JL> At least with partitioning there is a fighting chance that that won't be
> JL> necessary.
>
> Huh? His specific query was "WHERE md5 = '....'". Why on earth would
> that force a sequence scan if it were an indexed column? Heck, the
> btree index should rule out 15/16ths of the rows after the first
> character comparison.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org