| From: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Mark Cotner" <mcotner(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres -- merge tables |
| Date: | 2004-09-15 01:01:57 |
| Message-ID: | D74A0EF0-06B2-11D9-91A2-000A95C88220@myrealbox.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sep 15, 2004, at 8:32 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> The "partitions" are just tables, so no need for other management
> tools.
> Oracle treats the partitions as sub-tables, so you need a range of
> commands
> to add, swap etc the partitions of the main table.
>
> I guess a set of tools that emulates that functionality would be
> generically
> a good thing, if you can see a way to do that.
>
> Oracle partitions were restricted in only allowing a single load
> statement
> into a single partition at any time, whereas multiple COPY statements
> can
> access a single partition table on PostgreSQL.
How does this compare to DB2 partitioning?
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2004-09-15 01:49:21 | Re: disk performance benchmarks |
| Previous Message | Mischa Sandberg | 2004-09-14 23:32:48 | Re: Data Warehouse Reevaluation - MySQL vs Postgres -- merge tables |