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 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-30 15:18:14 | Re: Coding style for emacs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-30 15:10:19 | Re: stats test on Windows is now failing repeatably? |