Обсуждение: BUG #7524: Partitioning
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 7524 Logged by: Pieter Viljoen Email address: pieter@infomet.com PostgreSQL version: 9.1.5 Operating system: WIndows Enterprise Server Description: = The TWO most important factors in hindering us to convert to Postgres are the following: Parallel execution of queries. No Table Partitioning (To actually propose that table inheritance is used for partitioning is abhorently proposterous. This basterdizes the intent of inheritance and means you are destroying the very principles of the underlying generalisation model you propose. It is also an indication that you do not have the capability to actually engineer the proper solution. It is a hoax right?)
wrote: > The TWO most important factors in hindering us to convert to > Postgres are the following: > > Parallel execution of queries. > > No Table Partitioning Not a bug, so off-topic for this list. If you need help figuring out how best to use PostgreSQL, or whether it is a good fit for your use-case, a post to pgsql-novice@postgresql.org would be more appropriate. -Kevin
On 09/09/12 14:01, Kevin Grittner wrote: > wrote: > >> The TWO most important factors in hindering us to convert to >> Postgres are the following: >> >> Parallel execution of queries. >> >> No Table Partitioning > > Not a bug, so off-topic for this list. If you need help figuring > out how best to use PostgreSQL, or whether it is a good fit for > your use-case, a post to pgsql-novice@postgresql.org would be more > appropriate. > > Or even -hackers - but it would make sense to ask 2 questions along the lines of: 1/ What is the current state of table partitioning...is anyone working on something a bit more native than abusing inheritance? 2/ Is anyone working on parallel query execution? Regards Mark
On 09/09/12 6:04 PM, Mark Kirkwood wrote: > 1/ What is the current state of table partitioning...is anyone working > on something a bit more native than abusing inheritance? enterpriseDB's commercial 'oracle compatible' fork has the Oracle DDL for creating and managing partitions, but afaik, it uses the same internal inheritance mechanisms. > 2/ Is anyone working on parallel query execution? someone presented a FOSS project on the pg-general list the other day that implements parallel execution using a postgres based engine, but it only supports fairly simple queries. I can't say I remember what it was called. -- john r pierce N 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast
On 09/09/12 9:31 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > >> 2/ Is anyone working on parallel query execution? > > someone presented a FOSS project on the pg-general list the other day > that implements parallel execution using a postgres based engine, but > it only supports fairly simple queries. I can't say I remember what > it was called. ah, was this https://launchpad.net/stado -- john r pierce N 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast
[Adding the OP back to CC, in case he's not subscribed to the list] Mark Kirkwood wrote: > On 09/09/12 14:01, Kevin Grittner wrote: >> "Pieter Viljoen Sr." wrote: >> >>> The TWO most important factors in hindering us to convert to >>> Postgres are the following: >>> >>> Parallel execution of queries. >>> >>> No Table Partitioning >> >> Not a bug, so off-topic for this list. If you need help figuring >> out how best to use PostgreSQL, or whether it is a good fit for >> your use-case, a post to pgsql-novice@postgresql.org would be more >> appropriate. >> >> > > Or even -hackers - but it would make sense to ask 2 questions along > the lines of: > > 1/ What is the current state of table partitioning...is anyone > working on something a bit more native than abusing inheritance? > > 2/ Is anyone working on parallel query execution? Yeah, I should have mentioned keeping each thread to a single topic. But I would still think -novice or -general would be more appropriate unless he was looking to write or sponsor packages for the features; so it depends. -Kevin