(unnamed)
text/plain
On Sep 1, 2010, at 5:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > =?iso-8859-1?Q?PostgreSQL_-_Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <postgres@cybertec.at> writes: >> On Sep 1, 2010, at 4:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> This is really premature, and anything you do along those lines now will >>> probably never get committed. > >> well, why non-overlapping? the idea is to make append smart enough to >> take the sorted lists from below and merge them which will give sorted >> output as well. > > Well, an extra merge step is going to change the cost comparisons quite > a bit; see Greg Starks' comments. But in any case, my point wasn't that > this is something we should never do; it was that it makes more sense to > wait till something has happened with explicit partitioning. > >>> The project direction is that we are going to add some explicit >>> representation of partitioned tables. > >> can you outline some ideas here and maybe point to some useful discussion here? > > There's been boatloads of discussion of partitioning, and at least one > submitted patch, over the past year or so ... > > regards, tom lane > -- Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH Gröhrmühlgasse 26 A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de