| From: | Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel(dot)Cecchet(at)asterdata(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Partitioning option for COPY |
| Date: | 2009-11-24 06:45:31 |
| Message-ID: | a301bfd90911232245t35e8a804g6f163d8c4d3ceb77@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
>> What would probably be helpful here is to take the mess of raw data
>> above and turn it into a simpler partitioning roadmap.
>
> Thanks for summarising.
>
Yeah, excellent summary Greg. As you rightly pointed out, partitioning
needs a broad roadmap so that the community can contribute in unison.
That ways we can in future avoid decent efforts like Manu's which
might not bear any fruit because of the prevailing confusion today..
> I briefly tried to do that on the thread for Itagaki-san's patch. That's
> a first stab at things, at least.
+1. Itagaki-san's patch seems like a firm foot forward.
Regards,
Nikhils
--
http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-11-24 07:05:48 | Re: SE-PgSQL patch review |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-11-24 06:12:43 | Re: SE-PgSQL patch review |