pg.ddx.io  pgsql-sql@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: John Lister <john.lister-ps@kickstone.com>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Partitioning improvements query
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:59:37 +0000
Message-ID: <4B6B4349.9060103@kickstone.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B6B4012.7040802@kickstone.co.uk>
References: <4B636022.90804@kickstone.com>
	<dcc563d11001291550j70867455q2f16fdf3a4a9cc4@mail.gmail.com>
	<3AD82906BF1A43CB940573A88A42C2B3@squarepi.com>
	<dcc563d11001300832g4ff23e8bo50ee6d0497ae3bdb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4B6B4012.7040802@kickstone.co.uk>

Hi all, I was just wondering if any progress has been made on improving 
partitioning, particuarly performance wise. I've found a few documents 
on the web, for example: 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Table_partitioning and 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Image:Partitioning_Requirements.pdf, 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgCon_2008_Developer_Meeting#Partitioning_Roadmap 
which mention improvements to partitioning, but I can't find any info if 
these have been acted on.

Just curious as things like pushing limits down to the sub queries would 
be a great feature, etc

Cheers

John

Message-ID: <4B6B4349.9060103@kickstone.com>
Permalink:  ../4B6B4349.9060103@kickstone.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/4B6B4349.9060103@kickstone.com

copy link · copy postgr.es

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: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
  Cc: john.lister-ps@kickstone.com
  Subject: Re: Partitioning improvements query
  In-Reply-To: <4B6B4349.9060103@kickstone.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox