On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Robert Eckhardt <reckha...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Akshay Joshi < > akshay.jo...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> Hi Dave >> >> As per discussion I have changed the logic of showing partitioned table >> in browser tree. Attached is the screenshot. >> Let me know your thoughts. >> > > Greenplum has had declarative partitioning for quite some time, I haven't > spent much time diving into the Postgres implementation specifically, > however, we have had some pain and I would suggest a little bit of thought > behind this. > > The issues we consistently face: > > - The huge (often thousands sometimes tens of thousands) number of > partitions makes rendering all of the partitions painfully slow and > frequently not useful. > > Perhaps, though I doubt that number would be common in Postgres. The problem though, is that there are both stats and sub-objects (indexes and triggers for example) that are part of the child partitions, not the parent - and they may differ from partition to partition. I don't see that we have any choice but to display them so users can work with them. > > - When end users are interested in looking at their partitions they > frequently don't want all of them displayed mindlessly > - They are looking at a subset of partitions > - Partitions are typically grouped around their inheritance > properties. > > How might you propose grouping them (based on the way they work in Postgres)? -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
