Re: [HACKERS] sketchy partcollation handling - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: [HACKERS] sketchy partcollation handling
Date
Msg-id 84ab38f9-3807-4d56-ee9e-1e7576e73952@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] sketchy partcollation handling  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2017/06/07 0:19, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> I think we can call it a bug of StorePartitionKey().  I looked at the
>> similar code in index_create() (which actually I had originally looked at
>> for reference when writing the partitioning code in question) and looks
>> like it doesn't store the dependency for collation 0 and for the default
>> collation of the database.  I think the partitioning code should do the
>> same.  Attached find a patch for the same (which also updates the
>> documentation as mentioned above); with the patch:
> 
> Thanks.  Committed.

Thank you.

Regards,
Amit




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] sketchy partcollation handling
Next
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] BUG #14682: row level security not work with partitionedtable