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

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect
Date
Msg-id 20180502061452.GA1723@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [SPAM] Re: Local partitioned indexes and pageinspect  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 01:38:22PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> 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.

That's what Peter is pointing to upthread and what the v1 of upthread
was doing.  I would tend to think to just keep the code simple and don't
add those extra checks, but I am fine to be beaten as well.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: A few warnings on Windows
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove mention in docs that foreign keys on partitioned tablesare not supported