Re: Auto Partitioning

Hi,

> > The only problem I have with this is that the shops I know with big
> > partitioned tables favor triggers over rules for both performance reason
> and
> > a cleaner implementation. Even with automated rule creation this isnt
> going
> > to change afaics... not to mention we already create our rules &
> triggers
> > automatically, so really this just isn't exciting to me (though it may
> make
> > it easier for people getting in on the ground floor)
>
> I second this. The trigger route is much more maintainable than the rule
> route. IMO what really needs to happen is something more low level where
> there are no DBA visible changes. Triggers also have overhead, it would
> be nice to get a little more bare metal with this.

I had raised this issue about rules/triggers back then and the responses
seemed to be evenly split as to which ones to use.

I think the broad question really is how well we want to support the current
inheritance based partitioning mechanism. If we want to stick to it for a
while (and to which we will stick to unless something concrete/better/"bare
metal" comes up), IMHO we should try to make things simpler (by automating
things if possible) to make it easier for people getting in.

Regards,
Nikhils

--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com