Re: Partitioning option for COPY
От | Itagaki Takahiro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Partitioning option for COPY |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20091125111614.9284.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Partitioning option for COPY (Emmanuel Cecchet <manu@asterdata.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Partitioning option for COPY
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Emmanuel Cecchet <manu@asterdata.com> wrote: > I guess the problem of handling user triggers is still open. > If we allow triggers on partitions, badly written logic could lead to > infinite loops in routing. Infinite loops are not a partition-related problem, no? We can also find infinite loops in user defined functions, recursive queries, etc. I think the only thing we can do for it is to *stop* loops instead of prevention, like max_stack_depth. > With the current proposed implementation, would it be > possible to define a view using child tables? No, if you mean using a partition-view. I'm thinking we are moving our implementation of partitioning from view-based to built-in feature. Do you have any use-cases that requires view-based partitioning? Was the inheritance-based partitioning not enough for it? Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: