Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps

From: Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps
Date: 2008-01-04 12:49:27
Message-ID: 477E2B57.9030708@bluegap.ch
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

Simon Riggs wrote:
> The smaller the partition size the greater the overhead of managing it.
> Also I've been looking at read-only tables and compression, as you may
> know. My idea was that in the future we could mark segments as either
> - read-only
> - compressed
> - able to be shipped off to hierarchical storage
>
> Those ideas work best if the partitioning is based around the physical
> file sizes we use for segments.

As much as I'd like this simplification.. But I'm still thinking of
these segments as an implementation detail of Postgres, and not
something the user should have to deal with.

Allowing the DBA to move segments to a different table space and giving
him the possibility to check which tuples are in which segment seems
awkward from a users perspective, IMO.

Regards

Markus

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Glyn Astill 2008-01-04 13:23:18 Problem with PgTcl auditing function on trigger
Previous Message Markus Schiltknecht 2008-01-04 12:39:42 Re: Dynamic Partitioning using Segment Visibility Maps