---------- Forwarded message ----------
On 10/22/08, Nikhil Sontakke <
nikhil.sontakke@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > >
> > >> Thanks for taking a look. But if I am not mistaken Gavin and co. are
> working
> > >> on a much exhaustive proposal. In light of that maybe this patch might
> not
> > >> be needed in the first place?
> > >>
> > >> I will wait for discussion and a subsequent collective consensus here,
> > >> before deciding the further course of actions.
> > >
> > > I think it is unwise to wait on Gavin for a more complex implemention
> > > --- we might end up with nothing for 8.4. As long as your syntax is
> > > compatible with whatever Gavin proposed Gavin can add on to your patch
> > > once it is applied.
> > >
> >
> > seems like you're a prophet... or i miss something?
> >
>
> :)
>
> Maybe I will try to summarize the functionality of this patch, rebase it
> against latest CVS head and try to get it on the commitfest queue atleast
> for further feedback to keep the ball rolling on auto-partitioning...
>
yeah! i was thinking on doing that but still have no time... and
frankly you're the best man for the job ;)
one thing i was thinking of is to use triggers instead of rules just
as our current docs recommends
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/ddl-partitioning.html with the benefit that a trigger can check if the child table exists
for the range being inserted and if not it can create it first...
haven't looked at the code in the detail but seems that your patch is
still missing the "create rule" part so we are in time to change
that... no?