Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04C172E02BB for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:07:47 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57164-03 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:07:39 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EFAD2E3C27 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:06:35 -0400 (AST) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2007 16:06:35 -0000 Received: from office01.emerion.com (EHLO [127.0.0.1]) [83.64.50.26] by mail.gmx.net (mp032) with SMTP; 29 Nov 2007 17:06:35 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1946847 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/EP9BmJh3Em71c9n8jWDVjAzU15VKRFqvnLKCtxr TwswkdtEhhkVj6 Message-ID: <474EE385.9030103@gmx.at> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:06:29 +0100 From: Michael Paesold User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joshua D. Drake" CC: NikhilS , Tom Lane , David Fetter , "Jonah H. Harris" , PostgreSQL Docs , PostgreSQL Patches Subject: Re: [DOCS] Partition: use triggers instead of rules References: <20071128202615.GG24146@fetter.org> <21686.1196283184@sss.pgh.pa.us> <36e682920711281858x9a37039sa104036bf025de41@mail.gmail.com> <20071129031702.GU24146@fetter.org> <2854.1196315753@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20071128224154.06f950c9@commandprompt.com> <474EDAE2.3010705@gmx.at> <474EE25E.3080304@commandprompt.com> In-Reply-To: <474EE25E.3080304@commandprompt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200711/288 X-Sequence-Number: 4529 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Michael Paesold wrote: >> I would also add another sentence about *why* the recommendation was >> changed. We have one rule-based setup here, and it has been working >> flawlessly for us,... so personally I don't even know the reasons. >> > > Rules are extremely slow in comparisons and not anywhere near as > flexible. As I said up post yesterday... they work well in the basic > partitioning configuration but anything else they are extremely deficient. Ah, thanks for that summary. How do they compare to triggers dynamically EXECUTEing the inserts? Is that a better solution, or should one really just use the IF ... ELSIF ... ELSIF ... ELSE pattern as suggested in the new docs? (Which means one has to re-create the complete trigger each time a partition is added.) Best Regards Michael Paesold