Re: Table Partitioning Advice Request - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Vincenzo Romano
Subject Re: Table Partitioning Advice Request
Date
Msg-id 3eff28920912170741y5baf71b4s4ae89bf64cb228e0@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Table Partitioning Advice Request  (Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>)
List pgsql-general
2009/12/17 Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>:
> Vincenzo Romano <vincenzo.romano@notorand.it> writes:
>> Is there any performance study for the trigger-based implementation?
>
> Consider that if you use RULE to partition, when you DROP a partition
> the INSERTs are locked out because the query depends on the table being
> droped.
>
> That alone could lead you to stop considering RULEs for partitioning.

In that case I would also drop the relevant rule(s).
But it seems anyway that the rule system would need to scan all the
rules in order to know which one(s) to apply.
And, at least in my case, I would have hundreds of rules ...

Thanks for the hint, anyway.

--
Vincenzo Romano
NON QVIETIS MARIBVS NAVTA PERITVS

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Adrian Klaver
Date:
Subject: Re: Automatic truncation of character values & casting to the type of a column type
Next
From: "Gauthier, Dave"
Date:
Subject: Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project