| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Syntax for partitioning |
| Date: | 2011-11-12 16:28:32 |
| Message-ID: | 28759.1321115312@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> While I agree that explicit partitioning is somewhat of a hack, it's a
> really useful hack. But for me the most important use of partitioning
> is "dropping a billion rows efficiently and getting the disk space
> back".
Right. The only way to make that speedy is for the partition boundaries
to match the desired granularity of data removal. I don't really see
any way that the database can be expected to know what that is, unless
it's told in advance. So AFAICS you really have to have a declarative
way of telling it how to do the partitioning --- it's not going to be
able to infer that automatically.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-11-12 17:29:50 | Re: Allow substitute allocators for PGresult. |
| Previous Message | Alexander Soudakov | 2011-11-12 15:54:42 | trivial patch: foreign table either defines row type |