Re: Partitioning and ORM tools

From: Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: CS DBA <cs_dba(at)consistentstate(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Partitioning and ORM tools
Date: 2016-03-22 18:55:28
Message-ID: CANu8FiyJBGbZFSpGWKnrN1hG8m9Ac4syivm77j_AGG_9fXzQ0g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Your problem seems strange as it has never been previously reported for
anyone else that has _successfully_ set up partioning.
Perhaps is you provide just a little bit more detail we might be able to
help you.
Useful and needed information would be:
1. Version of PostgreSQL
2. Operating System
3. Table structure for partitioned table
4. Trigger function and trigger used for insert
5. The actual insert statement.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 2:40 PM, CS DBA <cs_dba(at)consistentstate(dot)com> wrote:

> Hi All;
>
> we setup partitioning for a large table but had to back off because the
> return status (i.e: "INSERT 0 1") returns "INSERT 0 0" when inserting into
> the partitioned table which causes the ORM tool to assume the insert
> inserted 0 rows. Is there a standard / best practices work around for this?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

--
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rob Sargent 2016-03-22 19:10:09 Re: Partitioning and ORM tools
Previous Message CS DBA 2016-03-22 18:40:48 Partitioning and ORM tools