Re: Declarative partitioning - another take

On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Alexander Korotkov
<a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> Great! And it is very cool that we have basic infrastructure already
> committed. Thanks a lot to you and everybody involved.

Thanks.

>> of course, maybe you and some of your colleagues
>> would like to help review our patches, too.
> We understand our reviewing performance is not sufficient. Will try to do
> better during next commitfest.

Not trying to throw stones, just want to get as much committed as
possible. And I think our patches are good and valuable improvements
too, so I want to see them go in because they will help everybody.
Thanks for trying to increase the reviewing effort; it is sorely
needed.

>> Do you think this is
>> likely to be something where you can get something done quickly, with
>> the hope of getting it into v10?
>
> Yes, because we have set of features already implemented in pg_pathman. In
> particular we have following features from your list and some more.
>
> - more efficient plan-time partition pruning (constraint exclusion is too
> slow)
> - run-time partition pruning
> - insert (and eventually update) tuple routing for foreign partitions
> - hash partitioning
> - not scanning the parent

That's a lot of stuff. Getting even a couple of those would be a big win.

>> Time is growing short, but it would
>> be great to polish this a little more before we ship it.
>
> Yes. Getting at least some of this features committed to v10 would be great
> and improve partitioning usability a lot.

+1.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company