Horton

Re: Partitioning option for COPY

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Emmanuel Cecchet <manu@asterdata.com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndquadrant.com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel.Cecchet@asterdata.com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2009-11-25T23:28:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> It seems like the easiest way to resolve this without weird corner
> cases is to say that we fire triggers belonging to the parent table.
> The individual partition child tables either shouldn't have triggers
> at all, or we should restrict the cases in which those are considered
> applicable.
>
> As an example, what are you going to do with statement-level triggers?
> Fire them for *every* child whether it receives a row or not?  Doesn't
> seem like the right thing.

Just the tables that get a row?  I don't know, your way may be best,
but it seems like tables on individual partitions might be useful in
some situations.

> Again, this solution presupposes an explicit concept of partitioned
> tables within the system...

...Robert