Jan Urbański wrote:
> o) my main concern is still valid: the design was never agreed upon.
> The approach of using inheritance info for automatic partitioning is, at
> least IMHO, too restricted. Regular INSERTs won't get routed to child
> tables. Data from writable CTEs won't get routed. People wanting to do
> partitioning on something else that constraints are stuffed.
>
Whether or not the other paths to load data are supported, COPY is the
one you have to get right before this sort of feature is useful to the
sort of use-cases that need partitioning the most. While your concerns
are valid, I hope Emmanuel doesn't take your feedback the wrong way.
I'll take a working prototype that needs improvement over a paper design
with no implementation anytime. He's coming at this bottom-up starting
with the little details that needs to be right, the partitioning syntax
patch is starting at the top and working downward, there seems to be
clear progress being made toward the eventual goal somewhere in the
middle of all that here. Considering how long this area has been bogged
down in discussion without action, I'm rather glad we're seeing working
proof of concepts bits rather than just talking about things.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
