| From: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: non-overlapping, consecutive partitions |
| Date: | 2010-07-23 20:15:41 |
| Message-ID: | 4C49F86D.9030301@cs.helsinki.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/23/2010 11:04 PM, Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
> does anybody see a solution to this problem?
> what are the main showstoppers to make something like this work?
I think we should absolutely make this work when we have a good
partitioning implementation.
That said, I don't think it's wise to put a lot of effort into making
this work with our current partitioning method when the partitioning
patches are just around the corner. The developer time should be
directed at those patches instead.
Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-07-23 20:18:56 | Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions |
| Previous Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2010-07-23 20:09:26 | Re: Rewrite, normal execution vs. EXPLAIN ANALYZE |