| From: | Joe Uhl <joeuhl(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Partitioned Tables and ORDER BY |
| Date: | 2009-10-18 12:24:39 |
| Message-ID: | 4ADB0907.7070806@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
This seems like a pretty major weakness in PostgreSQL partitioning. I
have essentially settled on not being able to do queries against the
parent table when I want to order the results. Going to have to use a
Hibernate interceptor or something similar to rewrite the statements so
they hit specific partitions, will be working on this in the coming week.
This weakness is a bummer though as it makes partitions a lot less
useful. Having to hit specific child tables by name isn't much
different than just creating separate tables and not using partitions at
all.
Michal Szymanski wrote:
> I've described our problem here
> http://groups.google.pl/group/pgsql.performance/browse_thread/thread/54a7419381bd1565?hl=pl#
> Michal Szymanski
> http://blog.szymanskich.net
> http://techblog.freeconet.pl/
>
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Migowski | 2009-10-18 14:38:18 | Re: Calculation of unused columns |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2009-10-18 06:10:30 | Re: Issues with \copy from file |