| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, henk de wit <henk53602(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG? |
| Date: | 2009-05-07 02:16:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20090507021613.GQ4476@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Simon Riggs escribió:
> Hopefully, notions of partitioning won't be directly tied to chunking of
> data for parallel query access. Most queries access recent data and
> hence only a single partition (or stripe), so partitioning and
> parallelism and frequently exactly orthogonal.
I think there should be a way to refer to individual partitions as
objects. That way we could execute some commands to enable certain
optimizations, for example "mark this partition read only" which would
mean it could be marked as not needing vacuum.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-05-07 02:27:00 | Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG? |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-05-06 22:08:00 | Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG? |