Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But when I say
CREATE TABLE ( a int PRIMARY KEY, ... ) PARTITION blah ...
then I expect that the primary key will be enforced across all
partitions. We currently sidestep that issue by not offering seemingly
transparent partitioning. But if you are planning to offer that, the
unique index issue needs to be solved, and I see nothing in your plan
about that.
Agreed, it needs to Just Work. I think it'd still be useful though
if we only support auto-partitioning on the primary key, and that
restriction avoids the indexing problem.
Maybe. The most obvious use for automatic partitioning that I can think
of would be based in the value of a timestamptz field rather than any
PK. Of course I tend to work more in the OLTP field than in DW type
apps, where other considerations might apply.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
