3 ms·
Yeah, the at the billions of rows mark it definitely makes sense to start looking at splitting things up. On the other hand, the company I worked for split thin
by nicoburns 4y ago
Yeah, the at the billions of rows mark it definitely makes sense to start looking at splitting things up. On the other hand, the company I worked for split things up from the start, and when I joined - 4 years down the line - their biggest table had something like 50k rows, but their query performance was awful (tens of seconds in cases) because the data was so spread out.
- collyw 4y agoAm I missing something? 2 ^ 30 is over 1 billion. So a properly indexed table with 1 billion rows will take a similar effort to search as a 30 row unindexed table. Or are there other factors coming into play that I haven't thought of.
- adrianN 4y agoA thirty row table fits into the CPU cache, a 1 billion row table doesn't.