Re: Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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