Re: Declarative partitioning grammar - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Declarative partitioning grammar
Date
Msg-id 1200160050.4266.1367.camel@ebony.site
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Declarative partitioning grammar  (Gavin Sherry <swm@alcove.com.au>)
Responses Re: Declarative partitioning grammar  (Gavin Sherry <swm@alcove.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 01:59 +0100, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> The syntax is half the problem, performance is the other.

The syntax looks great to me, but I think it is about 5% of the problem,
maybe less. I don't really have any questions about the syntax, but I
may have thoughts when the implementation details emerge.

I'm not sure you'll be able to use PARTITION BY since its part of the
SQL Standard for Windowed grouping, which we do hope to implement one
day. It will be confusing to have two completely separate meanings for
the one phrase in our grammar.

The burning questions from my perspective are:

What is a partition?

How will the syntax be implemented within the backend?

--  Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning grammar
Next
From: Markus Schiltknecht
Date:
Subject: Re: Some ideas about Vacuum