Simon Riggs writes:
> Agreed. If all we are doing is adding synonyms for existing feature then
> its not good enough. We need a new syntax that does not need to be
> backwards compatible, allowing various code streamlining and more
> targeting to the desired use case. Inheritance != partitioning.
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 13:49 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> 1. It seems to me that the proposed design for pg_partition is poorly
> thought out. In particular, I don't see how this would work if we
> wanted to partition on multiple keys, which is a feature supported by
> both Oracle and MySQL. It wou
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
wrote:
>> 5. The use of the term "partition" is not very consistent. For
>> example, we use CREATE PARTITION to create a partition, but we use
>> DROP TABLE to get rid of it (there is no DROP PARTITION). I think
>> that the right syntax to use her
Robert Haas wrote:
> I've taken a little bit more of a look at this patch and I guess I'm
> not too happy with the design.
Thanks. I was thinking about only syntax for partitioning in the patch,
but I need more consideration about insert-aware catalog design.
> 5. The use of the term "partitio
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Takahiro Itagaki
wrote:
> Jaime Casanova wrote:
>> This one, doesn't apply to head anymore... please update
>
> Thank you for reviewing my patch!
>
> I attached an updated patch set for partitioning syntax.
I've taken a little bit more of a look at this patch and
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Kevin Grittner
wrote:
>
> It should have been. Neither the reviewer nor the author updated
> the CF web page (as they should have done). I've just made the
> entries to bring the patch it up to date in the web app.
>
Yeah! sorry i got bussy with other things...
Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> 2010/6/18 Takahiro Itagaki :
>> I attached an updated patch set for partitioning syntax.
>
> Isn't this linked from the RF web app??
It should have been. Neither the reviewer nor the author updated
the CF web page (as they should have done). I've just made the
entri
2010/6/18 Takahiro Itagaki :
>
> Jaime Casanova wrote:
>
>> This one, doesn't apply to head anymore... please update
>
> Thank you for reviewing my patch!
>
> I attached an updated patch set for partitioning syntax.
Isn't this linked from the RF web app??
Regards,
--
Hitoshi Harada
--
Sent v
Jaime Casanova wrote:
> This one, doesn't apply to head anymore... please update
Thank you for reviewing my patch!
I attached an updated patch set for partitioning syntax.
The latest codes are available at: http://repo.or.cz/w/pgsql-fdw.git
(I'm recycling FDW repo for the feature.)
* mast
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 3:55 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
wrote:
>
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> A couple of preliminary comments on this:
>
> Thanks.
> The attached is rebased on HEAD, with additional documentation.
>
This one, doesn't apply to head anymore... please update
--
Jaime Casanova www.
> > Will 9.1 partitions allow to reference partitioned tables in foreign keys?
>
> For now, you can do something like this:
>
> http://people.planetpostgresql.org/dfetter/index.php?/archives/51-
Partitioning-Is-Such-Sweet-Sorrow.html
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
Already did ;) But workable plain ref
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 01:55:45PM +0600, Dmitry Fefelov wrote:
> > Here is a revised partitioning syntax patch. It implements only syntax and
> > on-disk structure mentioned below:
> > Table Partitioning#Syntax
> > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning#Syntax
> > Table P
Dmitry Fefelov wrote:
> > Here is a revised partitioning syntax patch. It implements only syntax and
> > on-disk structure mentioned below:
> > Table Partitioning#Syntax
> > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning#Syntax
> > Table Partitioning#On-disk structure
> >
> Here is a revised partitioning syntax patch. It implements only syntax and
> on-disk structure mentioned below:
> Table Partitioning#Syntax
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning#Syntax
> Table Partitioning#On-disk structure
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Tabl
> Here is a revised partitioning syntax patch. It implements only syntax and
> on-disk structure mentioned below:
> Table Partitioning#Syntax
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning#Syntax
> Table Partitioning#On-disk structure
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Tabl
Robert Haas wrote:
> people get bogged down and don't have time to finish the work.
Ok, I moved this patch to the next commit fest for 9.1 alpha 1.
Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make ch
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 3:55 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> A couple of preliminary comments on this:
>
> Thanks.
> The attached is rebased on HEAD, with additional documentation.
>
>> 1. If we're thinking that this syntax should eventually result in
>> inserts (and updates?)
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Takahiro Itagaki
wrote:
> Here is a revised partitioning syntax patch. It implements only syntax and
> on-disk structure mentioned below:
> Table Partitioning#Syntax
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning#Syntax
> Table Partitioning#On-disk
18 matches
Mail list logo
