Hi all,
I did not find the option to remove the page so I just left the links
section. Feel free to remove the page so that there is no trace left of
this in the history. I don't think it is worth keeping anything since no
one found value in it anyway.
Until I figure out a way to come up with
> Approximately 50% of the Wiki entry is *exactly* the same as the
> document I wrote. Yes, the Wiki may one day become a collective work,
> but currently the following Wiki entry is fairly obviously not a
> collective work.
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning
[...]
> Your attitude
>> I am not a fan of the proposed syntax. It is conceptually similar to
>> what we already do with constraints, but invents a whole new syntax to
>> no obvious benefit that I can see.
>
> Actually I did not invent a new syntax but tried to map the Oracle syntax
> which seems to be a requirement th
On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 00:00 -0500, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> > At the moment, all you've done is show examples of how Oracle does
> > partitioning and restate my requirements document, significant chunks
> > completely verbatim. If you do that I think it fair to ask for a
> > specific credit on t
Hi,
> At the moment, all you've done is show examples of how Oracle does
>> partitioning and restate my requirements document, significant chunks
>> completely verbatim. If you do that I think it fair to ask for a
>> specific credit on that. But even so, thank you for the compliment.
>>
>> It was
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:04:00AM -0500, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Could you explain me what do you mean by putting a partition offline?
I sometimes use pg_dump to archive a partition, then drop that table,
bringing it offline, but if needed, it's there in the archive, ready
to rest
Hi Robert,
Thanks all for the time you are spending commenting on this during this
busy Commit Fest.
I am not a fan of the proposed syntax. It is conceptually similar to
what we already do with constraints, but invents a whole new syntax to
no obvious benefit that I can see.
Actually I did n
Hi David,
Could you explain me what do you mean by putting a partition offline?
I am just starting to get familiar with the use cases at Aster Data
Systems that are probably not covering all the requirements that
everyone has seen so far in the field. So I am eager to learn and try to
integrat
Simon,
At the moment, all you've done is show examples of how Oracle does
partitioning and restate my requirements document, significant chunks
completely verbatim. If you do that I think it fair to ask for a
specific credit on that. But even so, thank you for the compliment.
It was not my inte
> On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 21:48 -0500, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> I'm glad you're looking to work on it. I have a few comments.
> Others have suggested different syntax also, so you need to come up with
> arguments in favour of this particular syntax.
I am not a fan of the proposed syntax. It is con
On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 21:48 -0500, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> I have put a first draft of the wiki page dedicated to the table
> partitioning development at
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning
>
> The page is still incomplete and need much more work but it should be a
> good s
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 09:48:35PM -0500, Emmanuel Cecchet wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have put a first draft of the wiki page dedicated to the table
> partitioning development at
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning
>
> The page is still incomplete and need much more work but it should
Hi all,
I have put a first draft of the wiki page dedicated to the table
partitioning development at
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning
The page is still incomplete and need much more work but it should be a
good starting point for discussions and a way to move forward.
Tha
13 matches
Mail list logo
