Ühel kenal päeval, R, 2007-03-09 kell 15:41, kirjutas Jim Nasby: > On Mar 9, 2007, at 3:31 AM, Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: > >>> Since partition is inheritance-based, a simple DROP or "NO > >> INHERIT" > >>> will do the job to deal with the partition. Do we want to reinvent > >>> additional syntax when these are around and are documented? > >> > >> Well, if the syntax for adding a new partition eventually > >> ends up as ALTER TABLE ADD PARTITION, then it would make more > >> sense that you remove a partition via ALTER TABLE DROP PARTITION. > > > > But DROP PARTITION usually moves the data from this partition to other > > partitions, > > so it is something different. > > It does? IIRC every partitioning system I've seen DROP PARTITION > drops the data as well. It's up to you to move it somewhere else if > you want to keep it.
Will this proposed DROP PARTITION just disassociate the table from the master, or will it actually drop the partitions table from the whole database ?
Thats why I would prefer the existing mechanism, there a DROP on the child removes it and a NO INHERIT disassociates it. There might be situations where we would want to just disassociate and not drop.
Regards,
Nikhils
-- ---------------- Hannu Krosing Database Architect Skype Technologies OÜ Akadeemia tee 21 F, Tallinn, 12618, Estonia
