| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: On partitioning |
| Date: | 2014-12-12 21:48:28 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobH--E+GkGHsprjN-e_4-YR4208pmE9zp90sEjBjDBDMg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
>> Sure. Mind you, I'm not proposing that the syntax I just mooted is
>> actually for the best. What I'm saying is that we need to talk about
>> it.
>
> Frankly, if we're going to require users to explicitly define each partition
> then I think the most appropriate API would be a function. Users will be
> writing code to create new partitions as needed, and it's generally easier
> to write code that calls a function as opposed to glomming a text string
> together and passing that to EXECUTE.
I have very little idea what the API you're imagining would actually
look like from this description, but it sounds like a terrible idea.
We don't want to make this infinitely general. We need a *fast* way
to go from a value (or list of values, one per partitioning column) to
a partition OID, and the way to get there is not to call arbitrary
user code.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2014-12-12 21:54:08 | Re: PATCH: hashjoin - gracefully increasing NTUP_PER_BUCKET instead of batching |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-12-12 21:43:18 | Re: moving from contrib to bin |