Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: TODO Request

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TODO Request
Date: 2006-08-30 15:18:08
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 03:53:57PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
> Can we get:
> Multiple table indexes (for uniqueness across partitions for example)

Before any of the below happen, I think it'd be good to get a cleaner
way to define partitions; one that didn't involve manually messing with
constraints, etc.

> Auto creations of partitions

That would be nice, though if we had a built-in job facility of some
kind it wouldn't be needed for time-based partitioning.

> Hash partitioning
> Key partitioning
> Sub partitioning

Is there anything stopping those from being done right now? The only
thing I can think of that we're missing is an optimization where a
partition with a single key doesn't contain that key's data. Currently,
this can be done with "UNION VIEW partitioning", but perhaps there's
some more clever way to do it in the inheritance case.
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software    work: 512-231-6117
vcard:       cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-08-30 15:18:14
Subject: Re: Coding style for emacs
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-08-30 15:10:19
Subject: Re: stats test on Windows is now failing repeatably?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group