Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZKQwuHVEPd3Nxhp8PGtg78hfEZXYwgM1-tUu9P6qYCPg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning vs. information_schema  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 3:14 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> The bulk of operations that work on traditional tables also work on partitions
>> and partitioned tables.  The next closest kind of relation, a materialized
>> view, is far less table-like.  Therefore, I recommend showing both partitions
>> and partitioned tables in those views.  This is also consistent with the
>> decision to use words like "partition" and "partitioned" in messages only when
>> partitioning is relevant to the error.  For example, ATWrongRelkindError()
>> distinguishes materialized views from tables, but it does not distinguish
>> tables based on their participation in partitioning.
>
> +1

OK, whoever wants to write the patch, please step forward.

/me steps backward.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade vs extension upgrades
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] \if, \elseif, \else, \endif (was Re: PSQL commands:\quit_if, \quit_unless)