[eddd-ddde]

I never got to test this, but I always wanted to explore in postgres using table partitions to store soft deleted items in a different drive as a kind of archived storage.

I'm pretty sure it is possible, and it might even yield some performance improvements.

That way you wouldn't have to worry about deleted items impacting performance too much.

[gleenn]

It's definitely an interesting approach but the problem is now you have to change all your queries and undeleting get more complicated. There are strong trade-offs with almost all the approaches I've heard of.

[snuxoll]

With partitioning? No you don't. It gets a bit messy if you also want to partition a table by other values (like tenant id or something), since then you probably need to get into using table inheritance instead of the easier declarative partitioning - but either technique just gives you a single effective table to query.

[paulddraper]

IDK if the different drive is necessary, but yes partitioning on a deleted field would work.

Memory >>>>> Disk in importance.