Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG? - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?
Date
Msg-id 4077.1241663220@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?  (henk de wit <henk53602@hotmail.com>)
Responses Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?  (Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>)
List pgsql-performance
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> I think there should be a way to refer to individual partitions as
> objects.

Yeah, the individual partitions should be nameable tables, otherwise we
will be reinventing a *whole* lot of management stuff to little gain.
I don't actually think there is anything wrong with using table
inheritance as the basic infrastructure --- I just want more smarts
about one particular use pattern of inheritance.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?