agora inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jim Nasby <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Langote <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: Pg Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: On partitioning
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 14:05:57 -0600
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZx5QoL+QDieHgZou0BaOc-oqNNE2tY1_NG9U-Fd-d9TA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmobN+DT_=hj3NkXZgSv157-W24YaZ50oFdRbhS493covzg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZqndQQQY1U0OBxUOJy1RE_MAawJErghNB7RM8MPgCYDg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZ-HJOTPfZcnPOh27881xn4N1QGtY7J4nG+v6tV9cJjNw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoaU+0EN-XsAT1O+64xrENNJiKPgem+Q1hWzz7a=1MYrDA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1+pJaZGHBeSxKtUd_gNeGjUDMrftmwjGC+PBob-ZFNk-Q@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1K=_DxN-ALbDx-u6P=GOr94W04vOJu4qsExNLsKJoBx9g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZx5QoL+QDieHgZou0BaOc-oqNNE2tY1_NG9U-Fd-d9TA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 12/5/14, 2:02 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Jim Nasby <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The other option would be to use some custom rowtype to store boundary
>> values and have a method that can form a boundary tuple from a real one.
>> Either way, I suspect this is better than frequently evaluating
>> pg_node_trees.
>
> On what basis do you expect that? Every time you use a view, you're
> using a pg_node_tree. Nobody's ever complained that having to reload
> the pg_node_tree column was too slow, and I see no reason to suppose
> that things would be any different here.
>
> I mean, we can certainly invent something new if there is a reason to
> do so. But you (and a few other people) seem to be trying pretty hard
> to avoid using the massive amount of infrastructure that we already
> have to do almost this exact thing, which puzzles the heck out of me.
My concern is how to do the routing of incoming tuples. I'm assuming it'd be significantly faster to compare two tuples than to run each tuple through a bunch of nodetrees.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
view thread (170+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: On partitioning
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox