Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EFC72E3C57;
	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:35:36 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 09162-03-2; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:35:28 -0400 (AST)
Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-159.commandprompt.net
	[207.173.203.159])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029C52E3C69;
	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:32:26 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (or-69-34-217-90.sta.embarqhsd.net
 [69.34.217.90])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lATGWAfI002603
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:32:11 -0800
Message-ID: <474EE992.2050209@commandprompt.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:32:18 -0800
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (Windows/20070809)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Michael Paesold <mpaesold@gmx.at>, NikhilS <nikkhils@gmail.com>,
	David Fetter <david@fetter.org>,
	"Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] 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>
	<d3c4af540711290705q35ea51cdkfaa94b0c07a1aecc@mail.gmail.com>
	<474EDAE2.3010705@gmx.at> <474EE25E.3080304@commandprompt.com>
	<14455.1196353045@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <14455.1196353045@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0
	(lists.commandprompt.com [207.173.203.159]);
	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:32:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200711/126
X-Sequence-Number: 4659

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> 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.
> 
> I think that the above claim is exceedingly narrow-minded.

We are talking about partitioning. It is supposed to be narrow-minded.

>  A trigger
> will probably beat a rule for inserts/updates involving a small number
> of rows. 

Which is exactly what partitioning is doing.

  For large numbers of rows, like an INSERT/SELECT from another
> large table, the rule is likely to win, because its overhead is paid
> once per query not once per row.  Also, if you implement the trigger
> with an EXECUTE (forcing a planning cycle) intead of hard-coded
> commands, the speed advantage becomes even more dubious.

Not for partitioning. Although I agree with your sentiments for normal 
operation.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake