Re: Auto Partitioning

On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 13:59 +0530, NikhilS wrote:
> Hi,
>         > The only problem I have with this is that the shops I know
>         with big
>         > partitioned tables favor triggers over rules for both
>         performance reason and 
>         > a cleaner implementation.  Even with automated rule creation
>         this isnt going
>         > to change afaics... not to mention we already create our
>         rules & triggers
>         > automatically, so really this just isn't exciting to me
>         (though it may make 
>         > it easier for people getting in on the ground floor)
>         
>         I second this. The trigger route is much more maintainable
>         than the rule
>         route. IMO what really needs to happen is something more low
>         level where
>         there are no DBA visible changes. Triggers also have overhead,
>         it would
>         be nice to get a little more bare metal with this.
> 
> I had raised this issue about rules/triggers back then and the
> responses seemed to be evenly split as to which ones to use. 

Presumably your implementation already uses Triggers for INSERTs though,
so why not use triggers for everything?

--  Simon Riggs              EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com