Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([2a02:16a8:dc51::56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1fGQ3H-0001NN-Cs
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 May 2018 14:26:44 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1fGQ3G-0000W1-75
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 May 2018 14:26:42 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <a.sher@postgrespro.ru>)
	id 1fGQ3F-0000Vo-O8
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 May 2018 14:26:42 +0000
Received: from mail.postgrespro.ru ([93.174.131.138])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <a.sher@postgrespro.ru>)
	id 1fGQ3C-0004v5-2e
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 May 2018 14:26:40 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.postgrespro.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0935321C1F23;
	Wed,  9 May 2018 17:26:35 +0300 (MSK)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at postgrespro.ru
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=x tagged_above=-99 required=4 WHITELISTED tests=[]
	autolearn=unavailable
Received: from ars-thinkpad (nat03-43-2.netorn.net [188.35.130.88])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by mail.postgrespro.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D42B121C1EE2;
	Wed,  9 May 2018 17:26:34 +0300 (MSK)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=postgrespro.ru;
	s=mail; t=1525875994;
	bh=KNtm6f2k/3HShN7J4cIxbWAyEUeuGpmyqkFdVmb6DKc=;
	h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-reply-to:Date;
	b=TbfZxJimc2WMKqp/i9O5P9D+zcOQKvjhVROpsNBfNQmGHmmjre58+UC0y5ZEP09Hv
	 TmOGOtzrfwV95ec3yJQqsugESTIMkI7r2uhVcmHLlNTkEf2QCyR2LvRhfOvecboXky
	 vemd/KEtkvoMfWvq1j2uWohQZEm78zZao0Ejjhxk=
References: <87sh71cakz.fsf@ars-thinkpad>
 <CANP8+j+L5W22kuiMMwtjhanqMMos_eRfuE=K6V4Krw_hgpgEcA@mail.gmail.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 26.0.50
From: Arseny Sher <a.sher@postgrespro.ru>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Arseny Sher <a.sher@postgrespro.ru>,
 "pgsql-hackers\@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Indexes on partitioned tables and foreign partitions
In-reply-to: 
 <CANP8+j+L5W22kuiMMwtjhanqMMos_eRfuE=K6V4Krw_hgpgEcA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 17:26:34 +0300
Message-ID: <87r2mkdhwl.fsf@ars-thinkpad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
List-Id: <pgsql-hackers.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers>
Precedence: bulk


Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

> How much sense is it to have a partitioned table with a mix of local
> and foreign tables?

Well, as much sense as fdw-based sharding has, for instance. It is
arguable, but it exists.

> Shouldn't the fix be to allow creation of indexes on foreign tables?
> (Maybe they would be virtual or foreign indexes??)

Similar ideas were discussed at [1]. There was no wide consensus of even
what problems such feature would solve. Since currently indexes on
foreign tables are just forbidden, it seems to me that the best what
partitioning code can do today is just not creating them.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/4F62FD69.2060007%40lab.ntt.co.jp#4F62FD69.2060007@lab.ntt.co.jp

--
Arseny Sher
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company