From: | "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Scara Maccai" <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: partitioning using dblink |
Date: | 2008-02-29 17:26:10 |
Message-ID: | e51f66da0802290926g6419471fqa8288a13640eaca1@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 2/29/08, Scara Maccai <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> wrote:
> > Exactly, because inheritance/constraint exclusion wont work with views.
>
> Ok, so there should be something written in the docs about it...
> From:
>
> "the information about a view in the PostgreSQL
> system catalogs is exactly the same as it is for a table. So for the
> parser, there is absolutely no difference between a table and a view"
>
>
> I got that there should be no difference... plus, I don't get any errors, it's only that data in the view doesn't show up when I query the master table.
Seems like bug in docs/code. But I think the paragraph is written
with "in queries, views can be used anywhere tables can" in mind,
not that you can administer them the same way.
> > > 2) Why am I supposed to use unions in the view?
> >
> > So that query evaluator can exclude unnecessary partitions.
>
> Ok: that would be another way of having partitions, right?
Yes, effect should be same.
--
marko
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bryan Murphy | 2008-02-29 17:29:29 | Schema Export/Import |
Previous Message | Clodoaldo | 2008-02-29 17:23:32 | Re: Insert vs Update syntax |