Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmoag=oSHfSp0bswWCKxk=-pVYWTtKHry1Hpv2rV8mCi=pA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> You're right.  I agree that whatever text we add here should be pointing
> out that statement-level triggers of affected child tables are not fired,
> when root parent is specified in the command.
>
> Since there was least some talk of changing that behavior for regular
> inheritance so that statement triggers of any affected children are fired
> [1], I thought we shouldn't say something general that applies to both
> inheritance and partitioning.  But since nothing has happened in that
> regard, we might as well.
>
> How about the attached?

Looks better, but I think we should say "statement" instead of
"operation" for consistency with the previous paragraph, and it
certainly shouldn't be capitalized.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION,query cancellations and slot handling)
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization