Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: henk de wit <henk53602(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?
Date: 2009-05-06 21:34:15
Message-ID: 1241645655.6109.36.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance


On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 11:27 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:

> The problem has been finding someone who has both the time and the
> ability to do the work.

Unfortunately there has been significant debate over which parts of
partitioning need to be improved. My own view is that considerable
attention needs to be applied to both the executor and planner to
improve matters and that syntax improvements are largely irrelevant,
though seductive.

Deep improvements will require significant analysis, agreement, effort
and skill. What we have now took approximately 20 days to implement,
with later patches adding about another 10-20 days work. I'd estimate
the required work as 60-100 days work from primary author, plus planning
and discussion time. YMMV.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-05-06 21:55:00 Re: Transparent table partitioning in future version of PG?
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2009-05-06 21:23:55 Re: Any better plan for this query?..