Re: Feature suggestions (long)
От | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Feature suggestions (long) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961FB3@m0114.s-mxs.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Feature suggestions (long) (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Feature suggestions (long)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> But the RULE system is not really suited to this. I havn't written it all > out but by my calculations the number of rules required is about (N^2+N)/2 > where N is the number of partitions. That's one UPDATE rule for each pair of > tables plus a set of INSERT rules (DELETE requires nothing special). And > each of those rules will be used every single time that table is queried > (both inserts and updates). That's not terribly efficient. > Mind you, maybe there's a better way of doing it. I havn't totally gotten my > head around rules. Maybe it indicates that improvements could be made to the > rule system. What you need is one view that is a union all select selecting all your partial tables, all applications only accesses this one view. You need 1 insert 2 update 1 delete rule for each table plus 3 remainder rules (=4*N + 3 rules) (the select rule is already done by create view), plus one check constraint for each partial table. You can restrict access to the partial tables with normal grant/revoke's. The appls only need grants on the view (which is updateable with above rules). Andreas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: