Syntax for partitioning
in [PgSql]
|
Prev: [HACKERS] pg_read_file() and non-ascii input file
Next: [HACKERS] Proposal - temporal contrib module
From: Simon Riggs on 4 Dec 2009 04:00 On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 11:54 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote: > Here is an update partitioning syntax patch. > > A bug reported by Marko is fixed. I will review and eventually commit this, if appropriate, though it is 3rd in my queue and will probably not be done for at least 2 weeks, possibly 4 weeks. Some brief review comments * SQL:2008 contains PARTITION BY syntax, though in completely different context. A possible alternative would be to use PARTITIONED BY. Please justify either way. Possibly add short section to docs to explain this. * There are relatively few comments in-line. Please can you provide a README section for the code that explains how partitioning works? A reviewer's guide would also be helpful to explain some of the design decisions in particular places. * All of the tests use about 4 partitions, which is the kind of thing that makes me think the test coverage isn't wide enough. More tests please. This would include operations on 0?, 1 and many partitions. We also need more test failures, covering all the dumbass things people will attempt. Also need partitioning by strange datatypes, arrays, timestamps with timezones and stupidly long list values. Read Rob Treat's humorous dissection of earlier partitioning features at PGcon to see what needs to be covered. * Docs. This is looking fairly solid, so please begin working on docs. I won't hold you to this in next few weeks, but we know it needs doing. * It is essential that we have large real-world(ish) performance test results that proves this patch will work in the areas for which it is intended. We need a test with 500 partitions, using at least 10MB partitions to see if there are any scale-related issues. This test case will help set targets for later developments because it will highlight performance issues in planning, DDL and other areas. This doesn't have to be by the patch author, but we need to see evidence that this patch operates in its primary use case. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Greg Smith on 6 Dec 2009 20:30 Simon Riggs wrote: > I will review and eventually commit this, if appropriate, though it is > 3rd in my queue and will probably not be done for at least 2 weeks, > possibly 4 weeks. > I've marked Simon as the next reviewer and expected committer on this patch and have updated it to "Returned with Feedback". That's not saying work is going to stop on it. It just looks like that is going to extend beyond when we want this CommitFest to finish, and I want to pull it off the list of things I'm monitoring as part of that. Everyone should keep hammering away at nailing this fundamental bit down, so that the rest of the partitioning patch ideas floating around finally have a firm place to start attaching to. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg(a)2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Itagaki Takahiro on 6 Dec 2009 20:56 Greg Smith <greg(a)2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I've marked Simon as the next reviewer and expected committer on this > patch and have updated it to "Returned with Feedback". OK. I'll re-submit improved patches in the next commit fest. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Simon Riggs on 14 Dec 2009 19:29 On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 09:00 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 11:54 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote: > > Here is an update partitioning syntax patch. > > > > A bug reported by Marko is fixed. > > I will review and eventually commit this, if appropriate, though it is > 3rd in my queue and will probably not be done for at least 2 weeks, > possibly 4 weeks. I'll have to go back on this unfortunately, sorry about that. I have enough items emerging from HS to keep me busy much longer than I thought. I'll run with VF if that's OK, since I have some other related changes in that area and it makes sense to understand that code also, if OK with you. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Jaime Casanova on 14 Dec 2009 21:31
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(a)2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 09:00 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 11:54 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote: >> > Here is an update partitioning syntax patch. >> > >> > A bug reported by Marko is fixed. >> >> I will review and eventually commit this, if appropriate, though it is >> 3rd in my queue and will probably not be done for at least 2 weeks, >> possibly 4 weeks. > > I'll have to go back on this unfortunately, sorry about that. > the next patch for this will arrive in the next commitfest so maybe you have more time then -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL AsesorÃa y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. +59387171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |