| From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Yuri Levinsky <yuril(at)celltick(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash partitioning. |
| Date: | 2013-06-26 00:59:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAGTBQpZRWAOzGh0ie42bxSQCH6MUy_JWTDihG0M2H6t6RaEf5w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> wrote:
> I agree though, that having an index implementation that can do the
> first level split faster than any partitioning mechanism can do is
> better, and that the main benefits of partitioning are in
> administration, *not* searching.
Indeed, but the proposal for hash partitions isn't fundamentally
different from range partitions. It's "easy-to-use partitions over
user-defined functions", hash or not.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Johnston | 2013-06-26 01:05:10 | Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- straw poll |
| Previous Message | Brendan Jurd | 2013-06-26 00:40:17 | Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- straw poll |