This is really a theoretical/anecdotal question, as I'm not at a scale yet
where this would measurable. I want to investigate while 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`, with the 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 into their 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
