Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18D92E0102;
	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:19:53 -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 64654-08; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:19:47 -0400 (AST)
Received: from alexis.jtlnet.com (alexis.jtlnet.com [69.36.9.81])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF522E2F8D;
	Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:19:46 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [192.168.10.103] (cpe-075-177-131-108.nc.res.rr.com
	[::ffff:75.177.131.108])
	(AUTH: PLAIN andrew@dunslane.net, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3, 256bits, AES256-SHA)
	by alexis.jtlnet.com with esmtp; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:32:47 -0500
	id 0007FC54.474EF7BF.00003006
Message-ID: <474EF4AE.8010405@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:19:42 -0500
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20071019 Fedora/1.0.9-3.fc6 pango-text
	SeaMonkey/1.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
CC: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, 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>
	<474EE992.2050209@commandprompt.com>
In-Reply-To: <474EE992.2050209@commandprompt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200711/131
X-Sequence-Number: 4664



Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>>  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.
>
>

Joshua, you're not making much sense here.

Tom is talking about partitioning and his analysis is correct *in the 
partitioning case* AFAICS.

What basis do you have for saying he is not?

cheers

andrew