Re: On partitioning
От | Amit Langote |
---|---|
Тема | Re: On partitioning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 002d01d01359$290cb4a0$7b261de0$@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: On partitioning (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: On partitioning
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> From: Robert Haas [mailto:robertmhaas@gmail.com] > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I guess you could list or hash partition on multiple columns, too. > > > > How would you distinguish values in list partition for multiple > > columns? I mean for range partition, we are sure there will > > be either one value for each column, but for list it could > > be multiple and not fixed for each partition, so I think it will not > > be easy to support the multicolumn partition key for list > > partitions. > > I don't understand. If you want to range partition on columns (a, b), > you say that, say, tuples with (a, b) values less than (100, 200) go > here and the rest go elsewhere. For list partitioning, you say that, > say, tuples with (a, b) values of EXACTLY (100, 200) go here and the > rest go elsewhere. I'm not sure how useful that is but it's not > illogical. > In case of list partitioning, 100 and 200 would respectively be one of the values in lists of allowed values for a and b.I thought his concern is whether this "list of values for each column in partkey" is as convenient to store and manipulateas range partvalues. Thanks, Amit
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: