Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMp0ubc4bHhDt83THWi6WNUzHWVN=Wg4ybbXbMGN7EUq3p1gJA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I think the question is whether we are going to make a distinction between > logical partitions (where the data division rule makes some sense to the > user) and physical partitions (where it needn't). I think it might be > perfectly reasonable for those to behave differently. Agreed. To summarize my perspective: * hash partitioning offers a nice way to divide the data for later processing by parallel query * range partitioning is good for partition elimination (constraint_exclusion) and separating hot/cold data (e.g. partitioning on date) * both offer some maintenance benefits (e.g. reindex one partition at a time), though range partitioning seems like it offers better flexibility here in some cases I lean toward separating the concepts, but Robert is making some reasonable arguments and I could be convinced. Regards, Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: