I was able to merge your ideas into the TODO because they are also items that relate to other optimizations. Look for 'subtable' on the web TODO to see the changes:
> * Allow a single index to index multiple tables (for inheritance and subtables) > * Improve the planner to use CHECK constraints to prune the plan (for subtables) > * Allow partitioning of table into multiple subtables --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 10:02:24AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 12:40:00AM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > > Anyway, the general trend seems to be against the idea so I may as well go > > > think of something else :) > > > > I'm disappointed to hear that. Having no way to effectively partition > > data is a real pain in pgsql, and your proposal would adress that. Yes, > > you can build it yourself by creating the view and all the rules by > > hand, but that has a lot of drawbacks: > > I agree, there is a lot of potential here. And I don't beleive it would be > too much work as most of the infrastructure is already there. At this stage > I'm just wondering if it will go on the TODO list. I propose that the > following items be added: > > * Improve the planner to take CHECK constraints into account to prune the plan. > * Allow a single index to index multiple tables (also for inherited PRIMARY KEYS) > * Allow partitioning of table into multiple subtables > > The first two items would be useful in their own right. With them the final > one would be straight forward. I'd be prepared to put some effort into this > if there is some indication it would be accepted. > > > I don't know what the policies for patches are, but I'd hope that the > > core team would consider adding this functionality, especially since a > > first-round implimentation can be done entirely with rules (or so it > > seems). > > Well, I think the policy is 'if you write the code you have a better chance > to have it accepted' :) So, if it's likely to be accepted then we only need > to find someone to code it. Given the other priorities currently I think > waiting for the core team to write it would be futile (unless you can > convince someone like IBM to give the core team money to write it). > > Right now I'd be happy if the anonymous CVS server would talk to me :) > > By the way, has anyone given thought to user-defined storage managers? Apart > from allowing backward compatable table access, you could implement a simple > version of partitioning that doesn't take advantage of planner tricks. > > Have a nice day, > -- > Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > > "the West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or > > religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. > > Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do." > > - Samuel P. Huntington -- End of PGP section, PGP failed! -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
