Re: Partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: Partitioning
Date
Msg-id 20070110210931.GY12217@nasby.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Partitioning  ("Jeremy Haile" <jhaile@fastmail.fm>)
Responses Re: Partitioning
Re: Partitioning
List pgsql-performance
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 03:28:00PM -0500, Jeremy Haile wrote:
> This seems so much more intuitive and simpler than what is required to
> set it up in PostgreSQL.  Does PostgreSQL's approach to table
> partitioning have any advantage over MySQL?  Is a "nicer" syntax planned
> for Postgres?

The focus was to get the base functionality working, and working
correctly. Another consideration is that there's multiple ways to
accomplish the partitioning; exposing the basic functionality without
enforcing a given interface provides more flexibility (ie: it appears
that you can't do list partitioning with MySQL, while you can with
PostgreSQL).
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Steven Flatt"
Date:
Subject: Re: table partioning performance
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: High inserts, bulk deletes - autovacuum vs scheduled vacuum