On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:45:29PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > There is one situation where you need to be more flexible, and that is > if you ever want to support online repartitioning. To do that you have > to distinguish between "I want to insert tuple X, which partition > should it go into" and "I want to know which partitions I need to look > for partition_key=Y". > > For the latter you really have need an expression per partition, or > something equivalent. If performance is an issue I suppose you could > live with having an "old" and an "new" partition scheme, so you > couldn't have two "live repartitionings" happening simultaneously. > > Now, if you want to close the door on online repartitioning forever > then that fine. But being in the position of having to say "yes our > partitioning scheme sucks, but we would have to take the database down > for a week to fix it" is no fun. > > Unless logical replication provides a way out maybe??
I am unclear why having information per-partition rather than on the parent table helps with online reparitioning. Robert's idea of using normal table inheritance means we can access/move the data independently of the partitioning system. My guess is that we will need to do repartitioning with some tool, rather than as part of normal database operation. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
