| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Samba GUEYE <samba(dot)gueye(at)intesens(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Postgre Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Table partitioning problem |
| Date: | 2011-03-14 19:40:33 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinxQ53kCc+V4XHtWmtHw_utwkbuwFz8qVLPg=Hp@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Samba GUEYE <samba(dot)gueye(at)intesens(dot)com> wrote:
> Yeah but is there a workaround to force the root table to propagate the
> foreign key to the partitionned table
> because right now all foreign keys to partitionned table throws constraints
> violation and it's a big problem for me
No. Generally, table partitioning is not a good idea unless you are
dealing with really large tables, and nearly all of your queries apply
only to a single partition. Most likely you are better off not using
table inheritance in the first place if you need this feature.
It would be nice if we had a way to do this for the rare cases where
it would be useful, but we don't.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Conor Walsh | 2011-03-14 20:22:20 | Re: Table partitioning problem |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-03-14 18:50:36 | Re: Performance regression from 8.3.7 to 9.0.3 |