Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect
Date
Msg-id 1e04d2ca-330a-ba2d-d629-ea5e5010b7c6@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2018/05/02 13:38, Amit Langote wrote:
> --- a/contrib/amcheck/expected/check_btree.out
> +++ b/contrib/amcheck/expected/check_btree.out
> 
> +-- verify partitioned tables are rejected (error)
> +SELECT bt_index_check('bttest_partitioned');
> +ERROR:  "bttest_partitioned" is not an index
> 
> Perhaps, I'm just repeating what's already been said, but I think it might
> be better to have the word "partitioned" in the message.
> 
> ERROR: "bttest_partitioned" is partitioned index
> 
> ..which Robert seems to think might not be too bad.
> 
> That will need adding some code to these modules like we did in
> c08d82f38ebf763 [1].

Sorry, it appears that our mail system added "[SPAM]" to the subject-line
for one reason or another, which I forgot to manually remove when editing
the email.

- Amit



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove mention in docs that foreign keys on partitioned tablesare not supported