Partioning Vs Sharding

misc/PartioningVsSharding.md

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+# Partitioning Vs Sharding
+
+Both sharding and partitioning are techniques used to manage large databases, but they differ in how they distribute the data:
+
+**Sharding**
+
+- **Distribution:** Sharding splits the data horizontally across **multiple servers or nodes**. Each shard is a complete and independent subset of the data, containing its own copy of the table schema.
+- **Scalability:** Sharding excels at horizontal scaling. As your data grows, you can simply add more servers to distribute the load.
+- **Complexity:** Sharding introduces complexity in managing a distributed system. You need to handle routing queries to the appropriate shard and ensure data consistency across all shards.
+- **Example:** Imagine a social media platform with sharded user data. Users from North America might be stored on one shard, while users from Europe reside on another.
+
+**Partitioning**
+
+- **Distribution:** Partitioning divides a **single table** horizontally within the same database server. Partitions are essentially sub-tables that hold specific subsets of the data based on a chosen criteria.
+- **Performance:** Partitioning improves query performance by allowing you to quickly locate relevant data. Queries can target specific partitions, reducing the amount of data scanned.
+- **Management:** Partitioning is easier to manage compared to sharding as everything remains within a single server.
+- **Example:** An e-commerce website might partition its order table by year. Queries for past orders can then be directed to the appropriate year partition.
+
+**Here's a table summarizing the key differences:**
+
+| Feature      | Sharding                                                 | Partitioning                             |
+| ------------ | -------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------- |
+| Distribution | Across multiple servers                                  | Within a single server                   |
+| Scalability  | Excellent horizontal scaling                             | Limited by server capacity               |
+| Complexity   | More complex (distributed system management)             | Simpler management                       |
+| Performance  | Improved due to parallel processing                      | Improved for focused queries             |
+| Consistency  | Maintaining consistency across shards can be challenging | Consistency is generally straightforward |
+
+**In conclusion:**
+
+- Use sharding for massive datasets requiring horizontal scalability and potentially high write volume.
+- Use partitioning for improved query performance on large tables within a single server, especially when queries target specific subsets of data.