> tfinneid@student.matnat.uio.no wrote:
>> > tfinneid@student.matnat.uio.no wrote:
>> >> Thats good enough for me, thats exactly what I want.
>> >
>> > In that case, why use partitions at all? They are simple independent
>> > tables.
>>
>> For two reasons,
>> - the data logically belongs together.
>> - because its more practical to create tables as childs of a parent
>> table
>> than as independent tables.
>> - changes to the table is applied to all partitions, and prohibits
>> tables with different dd.
>> - performing the create operation does not require the source code to
>> contain the ddl of the parent table.
>
> You can use CREATE TABLE LIKE, which copies the definition but does not
> set the inheritance.
I know, but point 1 of reason 2 was why I decided against it. I was
discussing the different options with myself when I was trying to decide,
and I decided on the partitions. So unless there will be a problem with
the real operations, I cant se any reason to change.
regards
thomas
