Dear robjsargent@xxxxxxxxx, W dniu 16.09.2017 o 17:19, Gmail pisze: > > >> On Sep 16, 2017, at 8:23 AM, Rafal Pietrak <rafal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> W dniu 16.09.2017 o 15:45, Adam Brusselback pisze: >>> Here is the last discussion I saw on >>> it: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/90261791-b731-a516-ab2a-dafb97df4464%40postgrespro.ru#90261791-b731-a516-ab2a-dafb97df4464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/90261791-b731-a516-ab2a-dafb97df4464%40postgrespro.ru#90261791-b731-a516-ab2a-dafb97df4464@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >> >> I can see the discussion is packed with implementation details. That's >> promising :) >> >> Thenx! >> >> > For those of us scoring at home, here's what I have: > 1 You have a 6-deep hierarchy over 17 document types > you concede that standard master-detail/inheritance accomplishes what you need w.r.t to documents I do have 17 "process tables" ... they are "class-B" tables, they DONT need any hierarchy. One of them contain payment details and has FK do a document (in one of the 12 tables of "class-A", which are in 6 levels of hierachy) which this payment covers. They get multiplicated ONLY because PK in those 12 "class-A" tables must be accessed separately. And those I have. It goes like this: CREATE TABLE T1 (id int, b date); -- level 1 CREATE TABLE T2 (c text) INHERITS (T1); CREATE TABLE T3 (d text) INHERITS (T1); CREATE TABLE T4 (e text, tm date) INHERITS (T1); CREATE TABLE T5 (f text) INHERITS (T1); -- level 2 CREATE TABLE T6 (ca text) INHERITS (T2); CREATE TABLE T7 (db text, db2 text) INHERITS (T3); CREATE TABLE T8 (ec text, db4 test) INHERITS (T4); CREATE TABLE T9 (fd text) INHERITS (T5); -- level 3 CREATE TABLE T10 (db11 text) INHERITS (T7); -- level 4 ... still counting? And I haven't yet touch any of the 12 leaf tables I'm using. > 2 You don't have enough document instances to warrant partitioning I don't. My couple of thousands of documents is just nothing. I don't have "enough documents" (that's why I say I can live with a performance hit). true, true, true. But I do have enough document-content variety for that. I could collapse some of the hierarchy at the expense of some columns getting NULL for certain rows - but that's just nonesens. I'm not doing that. > 3 Your remaining problem is your workflow Sorry I don't understand this point. > 4 You have an academic interest in multi-table indexing > Yes. so what? As nobody have tried to advise me to change my schema, from my point of view the discussion goes just fine. And I've got some very interesting answers. Is there a problem with that? What exactly are you trying to say? -R -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
