Re: Inheritance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Inheritance
Date
Msg-id 20160523223125.GA406761@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Inheritance  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:

> My feeling about it is that we need to provide a partitioning feature
> that doesn't rely on the current notion of inheritance at all.  We've
> heard from multiple users who want to use large numbers of partitions,
> enough that simply having a separate relcache entry for each partition
> would be a performance problem, never mind the current approach to
> planning queries over inheritance trees.  So the partitions need to be
> objects much simpler than full-fledged tables.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but I agree on this, and I'm worried that
the patch being floated for partitioning may paint us on a corner from
which it may be difficult to get out.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Inheritance
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14153: Unrecognized node type error when upsert is present in recursive CTE