Re: Partitioning feature ...

From: Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Kedar Potdar <kedar(dot)potdar(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Gupta <amit(dot)pc(dot)gupta(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Partitioning feature ...
Date: 2009-03-23 11:39:18
Message-ID: [email protected]
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Kedar,

>
>
> The syntax used conforms to most of the suggestions mentioned in
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-01/msg00413.php, barring
> the following:
> -- Specification of partition names is optional. System will be able to
> generate partition names in such cases.
> -- Sub partitioning
>

I was wondering if there is a need to mention the type of partition while
dropping it.

E.g
ALTER table x DROP RANGE PARTITION x_part;

The type of partition (RANGE, HASH) could be dropped according to me.

>
> We are maintaining a system catalog(pg_partition) for partition meta-data.
> System will look-up this table to find appropriate partition to operate on.
> System internally uses low-level 'C' triggers to row-movement.
>

Can you elaborate more on how do you handle updates with these triggers?

Regards,
Nikhils
--
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2009-03-23 11:46:52 Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-03-23 11:34:31 Re: contrib function naming, and upgrade issues