On 2022-Oct-24, Finnerty, Jim wrote: > Is there a reason why HASH partitioning does not currently support > range partition bounds, where the values in the partition bounds would > refer to the hashed value?
Just lack of an implementation, I suppose. > 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. Well, modulus/remainder is what we have. If you have ideas for a different implementation, let's hear them. I suppose we would have to know about both the user interface and how it would internally, from two perspectives: how does tuple routing work (ie. how to match a tuple's values to a set of bound values), and how does partition pruning work (ie. how do partition bounds match a query's restriction clauses). -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/