From: | Jim Nasby <jim(dot)nasby(at)openscg(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Keith Fiske <keith(at)omniti(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding support for Default partition in partitioning |
Date: | 2017-03-10 07:12:06 |
Message-ID: | 4b030267-47cb-57dc-caa9-c436d8345ca5@openscg.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/7/17 10:30 AM, Keith Fiske wrote:
> I'm all for this feature and had suggested it back in the original
FWIW, I was working with a system just today that has an overflow partition.
> thread to add partitioning to 10. I agree that adding a new partition
> should not move any data out of the default. It's easy enough to set up
+1
> a monitor to watch for data existing in the default. Perhaps also adding
> a column to pg_partitioned_table that contains the oid of the default
> partition so it's easier to identify from a system catalog perspective
> and make that monitoring easier. I don't even see a need for it to fail
I agree that there should be a way to identify the default partition.
> either and not quite sure how that would even work? If they can't add a
> necessary child due to data being in the default, how can they ever get
> it out?
Yeah, was wondering that as well...
--
Jim Nasby, Chief Data Architect, OpenSCG
http://OpenSCG.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | tushar | 2017-03-10 07:39:16 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |
Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-03-10 07:03:51 | Re: Parallel Append implementation |