Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: TODO Request

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TODO Request
Date: 2006-08-30 15:18:08
Message-ID: 20060830151808.GT73562@pervasive.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 03:53:57PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Can we get:
> 
> Multiple table indexes (for uniqueness across partitions for example)

Before any of the below happen, I think it'd be good to get a cleaner
way to define partitions; one that didn't involve manually messing with
constraints, etc.

> Auto creations of partitions

That would be nice, though if we had a built-in job facility of some
kind it wouldn't be needed for time-based partitioning.

> Hash partitioning
> Key partitioning
> Sub partitioning

Is there anything stopping those from being done right now? The only
thing I can think of that we're missing is an optimization where a
partition with a single key doesn't contain that key's data. Currently,
this can be done with "UNION VIEW partitioning", but perhaps there's
some more clever way to do it in the inheritance case.
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-08-30 15:18:14
Subject: Re: Coding style for emacs
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-08-30 15:10:19
Subject: Re: stats test on Windows is now failing repeatably?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group