From: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Syntax for partitioning |
Date: | 2009-11-18 04:17:38 |
Message-ID: | 20091118131738.A497.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> wrote:
> Jaime Casanova wrote:
> >> PARTITION name VALUES LESS THAN { range_upper | MAXVALUE }
> >> | PARTITION name VALUES IN ( list_value [,...] | DEFAULT )
> >
> > i remember someone making a comment about actually using operators
> > instead of LESS THEN and family
>
> That doesn't sound like a bad idea..
I prefer to use widely-used syntax instead of postgres original one.
Oracle and MySQL already use "LESS THAN" and "IN" for partitioning.
I assume almost all user only use the default operators.
I don't want to break de facto standard for small utilization area.
I think truly what we want is a new partition "kind" in addition to
RANGE and LIST. If we want to split geometric data into paritions,
we need to treat the the partition key with gist-list operation.
I agree with a plan to add some additional parition kinds,
but want to keep RANGE and LIST partitions in the current syntax.
Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2009-11-18 04:21:35 | Re: Timezones (in 8.5?) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-11-18 04:13:17 | Re: operator exclusion constraints |