Re: no default hash partition - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: no default hash partition
Date
Msg-id 21893.1565212921@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: no default hash partition  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: no default hash partition
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2019-Aug-07, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hm, that's rather confusingly worded IMO.  Is the antecedent of "this
>> option" just DEFAULT, or does it mean that you can't use FOR VALUES,
>> or perchance it means that you can't use a PARTITION OF clause
>> at all?

> Uh, you're right, I hadn't noticed that.  Not my text.  I think this can
> be fixed easily as in the attached.  There are other options, but I like
> this one the best.

OK, but maybe also s/created as a default partition/created as the default
partition/ ?  Writing "a" carries the pretty clear implication that there
can be more than one, and contradicting that a sentence later doesn't
improve it.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Isaac Morland
Date:
Subject: Documentation clarification re: ANALYZE
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Documentation clarification re: ANALYZE