Re: unsupportable composite type partition keys - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: unsupportable composite type partition keys
Date
Msg-id 5361.1576602769@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to unsupportable composite type partition keys  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: unsupportable composite type partition keys  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes:
> It seems to me that we currently allow expressions that are anonymous
> and self-referencing composite type records as partition key, but
> shouldn't.  Allowing them leads to this:

Hm.  Seems like the restrictions here ought to be just about the same
as on index columns, no?  That is, it should be roughly a test like
"no pseudo-types".  The check you're proposing seems awfully specific,
and I doubt that the equivalent check in CREATE INDEX looks the same.
(But I didn't go look ... I might be wrong.)

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: client auth docs seem to have devolved
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: non-exclusive backup cleanup is mildly broken