Gregory Stark wrote:
> I also don't understand how this proposal deals with the more common use case
> of unloading and loading data. Normally in partitioned tables we build the
> data in a side table until the data is all correct then load it as a
> partition. If you treat it as a lower-level object then I don't see that
> working. The layout of the new table won't often match the layout of the
> target partitioned table.
>
>
>
+1
In addition, a similar use case is archival of "old" partitions as they
are not longer (commonly) accessed - perhaps to a different tablespace
(or even to backup media). I don't see how dynamic in-table partitioning
handles this, and I think it would highly desirable to be able to do
these things!
best wishes
Mark
