From 8e99d2c0281b1733a7c98a5d232efb73ec6a091f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Pierre-Yves Chibon Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:03:38 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Add some open questions regarding timescaledb Signed-off-by: Pierre-Yves Chibon --- docs/datanommer_datagrepper/pg_timescaledb.rst | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/docs/datanommer_datagrepper/pg_timescaledb.rst b/docs/datanommer_datagrepper/pg_timescaledb.rst index 4cfec50..9b281f5 100644 --- a/docs/datanommer_datagrepper/pg_timescaledb.rst +++ b/docs/datanommer_datagrepper/pg_timescaledb.rst @@ -62,3 +62,12 @@ After converting the `messages` table to use timescaledb, we've realized that timescaledb uses table partitioning as well. This leads to the same issue with the foreign key constraints that we have seen in the plain partitioning approach we took. + + +Open questions +-------------- + +* How will upgrading the postgresql version with the timescaledb plugin look like? + +It looks like the timescaledb folks are involved enough in postgresql itself that +we think things will work, but we have not had on-hands experience with it.