Good advice on the partitioning idea. I may have to restructure some of my queries, since some of them query across the whole range - but it may be a much more performant solution. How is the performance when querying across a set of partitioned tables vs. querying on a single table with all rows? This may be a long term idea I could tackle, but is probably not feasible for my current time-frame. Does my current approach of disabling autovacuum and manually vacuuming once-an-hour sound like a good idea, or would I likely have better results by auto-vacuuming and turning row-level stats back on? On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:02:25 +0100, "Florian Weimer" <fweimer@xxxxxx> said: > * Jeremy Haile: > > > I'd like any performance advice, but my main concern is the amount of > > time vacuum/analyze runs and its possible impact on the overall DB > > performance. Thanks! > > You could partition your data tables by date and discard old data > simply by dropping the tables. This is far more effective than > vacuuming, but obviously, this approach cannot be used in all cases > (e.g. if you need more dynamic expiry rules). > > -- > Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxx> > BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ > Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 > D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
