On 23 June 2014 21:51, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > I also wouldn't want this to become > an excuse to not improve our current logging infrastructure, which is > how we got to the place we are wrt partitioning, imv.
Not the case at all. I wrote the existing partitioning code in 6 weeks in 2005, with review and rewrite by Tom. It was fairly obvious after a year or two that there were major shortcomings that needed to be addressed. Partitioning has been held back by not having someone that genuinely understands both the problem and reasonable solutions from spending time on this in the last 9 years. We've had 2.5 attempts over that time, but the first two were completely wasted because they weren't discussed on list first and when they were the ideas in those patches were shot down in seconds, regrettably. Nothing about this patch bears any resemblance to that situation. I personally never had the time or money to fix that situation until now, so I'm hoping and expecting that that will change in 9.5, as discussed in developer meeting. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
