Re: parse partition strategy string in gram.y
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: "Finnerty, Jim" <jfinnert@amazon.com>, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>,
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
"pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org"
<pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-10-25T00:50:24Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > On 2022-Oct-24, Finnerty, Jim wrote: >> The advantage of hash partition bounds is that they are not >> domain-specific, as they are for ordinary RANGE partitions, but they >> are more flexible than MODULUS/REMAINDER partition bounds. I'm more than a bit skeptical of that claim. Under what circumstances (other than a really awful hash function, perhaps) would it make sense to not use equi-sized hash partitions? If you can predict that more stuff is going to go into one partition than another, then you need to fix your hash function, not invent more complication for the core partitioning logic. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
meson: Split 'main' suite into 'regress' and 'isolation'
- a5ac3e76fe96 16.0 landed
-
Resolve partition strategy during early parsing
- 5fca91025e05 16.0 landed