On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 04:35:49PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 10:05:22AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > It has the 'side or additional benefit' being requested here. The ability
> > to filter the child table by some attribute. For example, if the child
> > tables are used for partitioning, and the attribute were to keep a date
> > range, the field restriction optimization could be used to automatically
> > determine the set of tables to use for the date range specified. With
> > such a change, it would even work automatically if the date ranges
> > overlapped for some reason. Selecting a table name by date is hacky. This
> > sort of solution would be a general solution to the problem.
> This is what "Constraint Exclusion" does. It uses CHECK constraints on
> a table to filter out tables that obviously don't apply to a query.
Good point. I'll have to invent another use case. :-)
> It's just the the specific case of "tableoid = XXX" is not supported
> right now.
Yes. This is what I was looking for Simon to admit. :-)
Cheers,
mark
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
