Re: Syntax for partitioning

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Syntax for partitioning
Date: 2009-10-30 08:03:00
Message-ID: 1256889780.525.0.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 15:19 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> I can't help but wonder if the PERIOD type might be better for
> representing a partition range. It would make it easier to express and
> enforce the constraint that no two partition ranges overlap ;)

I can't help but wonder if the period type might better be a generic
container for pairs of scalar, totally-ordered types.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Itagaki Takahiro 2009-10-30 08:25:49 CREATE TABLE ... INHERITS (parent INCLUDING xxx)
Previous Message Itagaki Takahiro 2009-10-30 05:07:20 Re: Syntax for partitioning