Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joe Conway
Subject Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql
Date
Msg-id 55e0da74-03d5-d364-7a90-f830ae934a26@joeconway.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql  (Mike Palmiotto <mike.palmiotto@crunchydata.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] partitioned tables and contrib/sepgsql  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 04/07/2017 11:37 AM, Mike Palmiotto wrote:
>>> I found some missing bits in the 0002 patch -- new version attached.
>>> Will wait on new regression tests before committing, but I expect we'll
>>> have those by end of today and be able to commit the rest tomorrow.
>>
>> Attached are the regression test updates for partitioned tables.
>
> Actually attached this time.

Based on my review and testing of the 0002 patch I believe it is
correct. However Mike and I just went through the regression test patch
line by line and there are issues he needs to address -- there is no way
that is happening by tonight as the output is very verbose and we need
to be sure we are both testing the correct things and getting the
correct behaviors.

Based on that I can:

1) commit the 0002 patch now before the feature freeze and follow up  with the regression test patch when ready in a
coupleof days 
2) hold off on both patches until ready
3) push both patches to the next commitfest/pg11

Some argue this is an open issue against the new partitioning feature in
pg10 and therefore should be addressed now, and others do not. I can see
both sides of that argument.

In any case, thoughts on what to do?

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] monitoring.sgml missing tag
Next
From: Claudio Freire
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Making clausesel.c Smarter