On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 05:00:01PM -0400, cbbrowne at ca.afilias.info wrote:
> > On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 09:43:46AM -0700, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> >> On Saturday 27 May 2006 19:26, elein <elein at varlena.com> wrote:
> >> > I've got a customer with tons of inherited tables.
> >> > Is there any reason why slony-I does not work with
> >> > inheritance?  I thought I heard that, but would like
> >> > very much to believe it is not true.
> >> >
> >> > Anything I should watch out for with inheritance and slony-I
> >> > if it does work?
> >>
> >> The only problem I've seen doing this is sometimes the column ordering
> >> gets
> >> out of whack depending when you add them on the master vs. copying the
> >> schema to the slave(s).
> >>
> >> This shouldn't be a problem now that Slony specifies the column ordering
> >> during COPY, though.  I haven't had any problems since that was changed.
> >>
> >
> > Good to know!  Any other gotchas anyone has run into may be helpful.
> > If it looks good, I am going to test on a wild schema with
> > tons of child tables (not my design!) and will report back.
> >
> > Thank you all for perltools...
> 
> If that "wild schema" is publishable, it would be a most excellent idea to
> add this as an additional test to the set of regression tests for Slony-I.
> 
> I think "desire for an inheritance case" has been around for a while; I
> haven't had a case for needing it, so I certainly haven't gotten around to
> it.

What about anything that exercises PostgreSQL's partitioning support?
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby at pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461