Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Compatibility with timescaledb #88

Open
0xForerunner opened this issue May 26, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Compatibility with timescaledb #88

0xForerunner opened this issue May 26, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@0xForerunner
Copy link

0xForerunner commented May 26, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Anyone know if there's any chance this is compatible with hyper tables? Continuous aggregates don't seem to be flexible enough for my use case and I'm wondering if pg_ivm would work here.
@yjhjstz
Copy link

yjhjstz commented May 28, 2024

no, pg_ivm do not support PARTITIONED TABLE.

@yugo-n
Copy link
Collaborator

yugo-n commented Oct 14, 2024

Yes, pg_ivm doesn't support partitioned table or table inheritance for now.
I would like to support partitioned table in future, but not yet implemented.

@yugo-n yugo-n added the question Further information is requested label Oct 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@yugo-n @yjhjstz @0xForerunner