Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From amul sul
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning
Date
Msg-id CAAJ_b96r0GwTG4sb42BdaXVhn2QZTJ1avQO8fU5i70ukSyqeEQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> Hash partitioning will partition the data based on the hash value of the
>> partition key. Does that require collation? Should we throw an error/warning if
>> collation is specified in PARTITION BY clause?
>
> Collation is only relevant for ordering, not equality.  Since hash
> opclasses provide only equality, not ordering, it's not relevant here.
> I'm not sure whether we should error out if it's specified or just
> silently ignore it.  Maybe an ERROR is a good idea?  But not sure.
>
IMHO, we could simply have a WARNING, and ignore collation, thoughts?

Updated patches attached.

Regards,
Amul

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Server Crashes if try to provide slot_name='none' atthe time of creating subscription.
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch to fix documentation about AFTER triggers