Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?

From: Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: Jerry Sievers <jerry(dot)sievers(at)comcast(dot)net>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Check constraints on partition parents only?
Date: 2011-07-26 22:57:41
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Jul 25, 2011, at 9:59 PM, Jerry Sievers wrote:
> That our version of partitioning can be overloaded like this though I
> think adds power. A bit of which we lost adding the restrictgion.

That's why I'd be opposed to any partitioning scheme that removed the ability to have different fields in different children. We've found that ability to be very useful. Likewise, I think we need to have intelligent plans involving a parent table that's either completely empty or mostly empty.

As for dealing with inheritance and putting stuff on some children but not others, take a look at There's a presentation there that discusses how we solved these issues and it includes the tools we created to do it. Note that we're close to releasing a cleaner version of that stuff, so if you decide to use it please ping me off-list if we haven't gotten the new stuff posted.
Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect jim(at)nasby(dot)net
512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2011-07-26 23:30:11 Re: storing TZ along timestamps
Previous Message Christopher Browne 2011-07-26 22:56:46 Re: storing TZ along timestamps