Re: On partitioning
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: On partitioning |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 30799.1415830015@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: On partitioning (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: On partitioning
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I thought putting the partition boundaries into pg_inherits was a
> strange choice. I'd put it in pg_class, or in pg_partition if we
> decide to create that.
Yeah. I rather doubt that we want this mechanism to be very closely
tied to the existing inheritance features. If we do that, we are
going to need a boatload of error checks to prevent people from breaking
partitioned tables by applying the sort of twiddling that inheritance
allows.
> Maybe as anyarray, but I think pg_node_tree
> might even be better. That can also represent data of some arbitrary
> type, but it doesn't enforce that everything is uniform.
Of course, the more general you make it, the more likely that it'll be
impossible to optimize well.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: