Hi, I tend to agree with Robert that partitioning should continue using inheritance based implementation. In addition to his point about reinventing things it could be pointed out that there are discussions/proposals elsewhere about building foreign table inheritance capability; having partitioning use the same general infrastructure would pave a way for including sharding features more easily in future (perhaps sooner).
Maybe I am missing something; but isn't it a case that making partitions a physical implementation detail would make it difficult to support individual partitions be on different servers (sharding basically)? Moreover, recent FDW development seems to be headed in direction of substantial core support for foreign objects/tables; it seems worthwhile for partitioning design to assume a course so that future sharding feature developers can leverage both. Perhaps I am just speculating here but I thought of adding this one point to the discussion. Having said that, it can also be seen that the subset of inheritance infrastructure that constitutes partitioning support machinery would have to be changed considerably if we are now onto partitioning 2.0 here. -- Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
