Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zeugswetter Andreas OSB sIT
Subject Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?
Date
Msg-id 6DAFE8F5425AB84DB3FCA4537D829A561CEA8AA8F9@M0164.s-mxs.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> >> So, barring objections, I'll go make this happen.  What do we want to
> >> call the intermediate constraint_exclusion value?  The first thing
> >> that comes to mind is constraint_exclusion = 'child', but perhaps
> >> someone has a better idea.
>
> > Not a huge fan of 'child' since it implies inheritance.  'union' doesn't
> > work for a similar reason.  What about 'partitioned'?
>
> Hm, how about just 'partition'?

+1

Andreas

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion?