Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> A trigger
>> will probably beat a rule for inserts/updates involving a small number
>> of rows.
>
> Which is exactly what partitioning is doing.
>
> For large numbers of rows, like an INSERT/SELECT from another
>> large table, the rule is likely to win, because its overhead is paid
>> once per query not once per row. Also, if you implement the trigger
>> with an EXECUTE (forcing a planning cycle) intead of hard-coded
>> commands, the speed advantage becomes even more dubious.
>
> Not for partitioning. Although I agree with your sentiments for normal
> operation.
>
>
Joshua, you're not making much sense here.
Tom is talking about partitioning and his analysis is correct *in the
partitioning case* AFAICS.
What basis do you have for saying he is not?
cheers
andrew
