On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 2:11 PM, kentoku <kentokushiba@gmail.com> wrote:
Additionally, for supporting different engines in different partitions, table options should better to be added engine names like global/session parameters for avoiding conflicting option names.
----- example start -----
If you create a table using following SQL, CREATE TABLE tbl_a (.....) innodb_XXX=1 pbxt_XXX=2 PARTITION BY KEY(a) ( PARTITION pt1 ENGINE=innodb innodb_YYY=3, PARTITION pt2 ENGINE=pbxt pbxt_ZZZ=4 );
pt1 options are innodb_XXX=1 innodb_YYY=3
and
pt2 options are pbxt_XXX=2 pbxt_ZZZ=4
----- example end -----
In the storage engine summit we discussed that different engines can support the same parameter XXX and it requires coordination to make sure both two engines agree on the semantics of XXX. Hence, while your example above is correct in the sense that it is possible for an engine to choose to prefix its own parameters, the normal use case would be: CREATE TABLE tbl_a (.....) XXX=1 PARTITION BY KEY(a) ( PARTITION pt1 ENGINE=innodb YYY=3, PARTITION pt2 ENGINE=pbxt ZZZ=4 ); pt1 options are XXX=1 YYY=3 and pt2 options are XXX=1 ZZZ=4 -- email: henrik.ingo@avoinelama.fi tel: +358-40-5697354 www: www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo book: www.openlife.cc