On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 3:35 AM, Nikhil Sontakke
<nikhil.sontakke@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> So +1 on solidifying the syntax first and then sorting out the other
> minute, intricate details later..
I like that idea as well but I have a concern. What will we do with
pg_dump. If the PARTITION commands are just syntactic sugar for
creating constraints and inherited tables then pg_dump will have to
generate the more generic commands for those objects. When we
eventually have real partitioning then restoring such a dump will not
create real partitions, just inherited tables. Perhaps we need some
kind of option to reverse-engineer partitioning commands from the
inheritance structure, but I fear having pg_dump reverse engineer
inherited tables to produce partitioning commands will be too hard and
error-prone. Hopefully that's too pessimistic though, if they were
produced by PARTITION commands they should be pretty regular.
--
greg
