Re: Auto Partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: Auto Partitioning
Date
Msg-id 4613F809.2010607@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Auto Partitioning  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Auto Partitioning  (Markus Schiltknecht <markus@bluegap.ch>)
Re: Auto Partitioning  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 20:55 +0200, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> 
>> Questioning the other way around: do we need any sort of multi-table 
>> indexes at all, or isn't it enough to teach the planner and executor how 
>> to intelligently scan through (possibly) multiple indexes to get what is 
>> requested?
> 
> No, I don't think we need multi-table indexes at all.

If we don't have multi-table indexes how do we enforce a primary key 
against a partitioned set? What about non primary keys that are just 
UNIQUE? What about check constraints that aren't apart of the exclusion?



Joshua D. Drake


> 
> The planner already uses the Append node to put together multiple plans.
> The great thing is it will put together IndexScans and SeqScans as
> applicable. No need for multi-scans as a special node type.
> 


-- 
      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Simon Riggs"
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto Partitioning
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto Partitioning