| From: | Michael Lewis <mlewis(at)entrata(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Declarative Range Partitioning Postgres 11 |
| Date: | 2019-10-08 17:25:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAHOFxGrbHDHoT6O+gnkvLRbUiSrYK9_TnMqme7ifzrE9yviPsw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:56 PM Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10/7/19 6:17 PM, Michael Lewis wrote:
> > No, what you want is not possible and probably won't ever be I would
> expect.
>
> Sure it is. Maybe not the (weird) way that Postgres does partitioning,
> but
> the legacy RDBMS that I still occasionally maintain has for at least 25
> years had partition key independent of any indexes.
>
> > Scanning every partition to validate the primary key isn't scalable.
>
> That's only because of the way Pg implements partitioning.
>
I can dig that, but since this is a Postgres list and everything I have
heard indicates it is not a limitation that is likely to be removed in
Postgres, it seems like we are having two different discussions.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Lewis | 2019-10-08 17:33:26 | Re: Declarative Range Partitioning Postgres 11 |
| Previous Message | dangal | 2019-10-08 16:20:45 | Re: temporary files |