Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Maksim Milyutin <milyutinma(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table
Date: 2018-01-04 21:45:51
Message-ID: 584730ad-6736-10bc-b5fa-251d4873b8ad@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/4/18 12:00, Robert Haas wrote:
>> The catalog representations of partitioned tables and partitioned
>> indexes are completely different, which may or may not be desirable.
>
> How so?

If someone wants to write a query, show me all the partitions of this
table versus show me all the partitions of this index, intuitively,
those could be the same, different only by some relkind references.
Currently, you'd have to write two completely different queries. It's
not a big deal, but it's a consideration.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2018-01-04 21:48:23 Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017 : Patch for predicate locking in Gist index
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2018-01-04 21:36:57 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort