> The following things are TODOs:
> iv) Auto generate rules using the checks mentioned for the partitions, to
> handle INSERTs/DELETEs/UPDATEs to navigate them to the appropriate child.
> Note that checks specified directly on the master table will get inherited
Am planning to do the above by using the check constraint specified for each
partition. This constraint's raw_expr field ends up becoming the whereClause
for the rule specific to that partition.
One question is whether we should we allow auto creation of UPDATE rules
given that updates can end up spanning multiple partitions if the column on
which partitioning is specified gets updated?
Also if we decide to auto - add rules for UPDATE, the raw_expr will need to
be modified to refer to "OLD."col, which can be quite a headache. We do not
have parsetree walker/mutator functions as far as I could see in the code.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Mark Dilger||Date: 2007-04-03 15:47:14|
|Subject: Re: Bug in UTF8-Validation Code?|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2007-04-03 15:17:41|
|Subject: Re: Implicit casts to text|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2007-04-03 16:26:32|
|Subject: Re: COPY-able sql log outputs|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2007-04-03 15:06:59|
|Subject: Re: [Fwd: Deferred Transactions, Transaction Guaranteeand COMMITwithout waiting]|