Re: Performance query about large tables, lots of concurrent access

Karl Wright writes:

> I'm not writing off autovacuum - just the concept that the large tables
> aren't the ones that are changing.  Unfortunately, they *are* the most
> dynamically updated.

Would be possible for you to partition the tables?
By date or some other fashion to try to have some tables not get affected by
the updates/inserts?

I am in the process of breaking a DB.. to have tables by dates. Our
historical data never changes.

Also, what is the physical size of all this data?