This week we’ll be covering another method of Postgres partitioning. This is a technique I personally prefer and try to use and advocate at every opportunity. It’s designed to straddle the line between traditional partitioning and standard monolithic table structure by using table inheritance as a convenience factor. The assumption here is that end-user applications either: Know that partitioning is in use. Only load “current” data and don’t care about partitions.

Most Postgres (PostgreSQL) users who are familiar with partitioning use the method described in the partitioning documentation. This architecture comes in a fairly standard stack: One empty base table for structure. At least one child table that inherits the base design. A trigger to redirect inserts based on the partitioning scheme. A constraint on each child table to enforce the partition scheme, and help the planner exclude child partitions from inapplicable queries.

What’s a good table to partition? It’s not always a question with an obvious answer. Most often, size and volume determine whether or not a table should be broken into several chunks. However, there’s also cases where business or architecture considerations might use partitioning to preserve a shared table structure, or drive aggregate analysis over a common core. In Postgres (PostgreSQL), this is even more relevant because of how partitioning is handled through inheritance.

I just realized I am a victim of the Peter Principle. Ever since I can remember, I’ve been a very quiet and withdrawn person. When people see that, they need to assign a cause. Well, if someone isn’t talking, they must be listening or thinking. If they think a lot, they must be smart. So every adult I ever met when I was a child always treated that way. Of course, I am then pressured to push myself—to fulfill their expectations.

Humanity simply doesn’t have a brain capable of it. People can only mentally relate to a certain number of people or ideals. Anything else becomes foreign. Our animal brains see foreign things as potential threats, and puts up guards. Suddenly, a person starts to wonder: why don’t those other people do it the way we do? The ‘it’ here can be anything: Religion, politics, pick any subject. That question evolves into a disagreement, then an argument, then a schism, and so on.