Re: [HACKERS] Documentation improvements for partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Documentation improvements for partitioning
Date
Msg-id 20170215143734.eb2io4k6qmktjbiy@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Documentation improvements for partitioning  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Documentation improvements for partitioning  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 02/15/2017 06:10 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On 13 February 2017 at 05:21, Amit Langote
> > <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> > If I issue DROP TABLE elsewhere, it doesn't refuse to drop because it
> > has indexes, sequences etc on it. So why should it just because it has
> > partitions?
> 
> Because partitions may have data.

So would the table, were it not partitioned.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Documentation improvements for partitioning
Next
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?