Jason, > Aside from running into a known bug with "too many triggers" when creating > gratuitous indices on these tables, I feel as it may be possible to do what > I want without breaking everything. But then again, am I taking too many > liberties with technology that maybe didn't have use cases like this one in > mind?
Well, you're pushing PostgreSQL partitioning further than it's currently able to go. Right now our range exclusion becomes too costly to be useful somewhere around 300 to 1000 partitions (depending on CPU and other issues) because the constraints are checked linearly. To make your scheme work, you'd need to improve our existing partitioning mechanisms to scale to 100,000 partitions. It would also help you to implement multiple inheritance so that you could have a partition which belonged to two masters. I'd be very interested in seeing you do so, of course, but this may be more hacking than you had in mind. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
