| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash Functions |
| Date: | 2017-05-16 20:25:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAMp0ubey3BApQ8oPp1GcJt-Q1OtAsXBdwLNtz3FVaQ5ohvAjgg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday, May 16, 2017, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I don't really find this a very practical design. If the table
> partitions are spread across different relfilenodes, then those
> relfilenodes have to have separate pg_class entries and separate
> indexes, and those indexes also need to have separate pg_class
> entries. Otherwise, nothing works. And if they do have separate
> pg_class entries, then the partitions have to have their own names,
> and likewise for their indexes, and a dump-and-reload has to preserve
> those names. If it doesn't, and those objects get new system-assigned
> names after the dump-and-reload, then dump restoration can fail when a
> system-assigned name collides with an existing name that is first
> mentioned later in the dump.
Why can't hash partitions be stored in tables the same way as we do TOAST?
That should take care of the naming problem.
> If Java has portable hash functions, why can't we?
Java standardizes on a particular unicode encoding (utf-16). Are you
suggesting that we do the same? Or is there another solution that I am
missing?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2017-05-16 21:20:37 | Re: transition table behavior with inheritance appears broken (was: Declarative partitioning - another take) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-05-16 19:08:33 | Re: Improvement in log message of logical replication worker |