Re: [HACKERS] Dropping partitioned table drops a previously detached partition - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ashutosh Bapat
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Dropping partitioned table drops a previously detached partition
Date
Msg-id CAFjFpRcMtQ6cjpKNUEa4VjsZNttefYcszSktEoJVwztkfWBKrg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Dropping partitioned table drops a previously detached partition  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have added tests to the
>> 0001-Dependency-between-partitioned-table-and-partition_v1.patch. Please
>> find attached the v2 patch.
>
> Thanks.  Committed.

Thanks.

> I don't think the 0002 patch is an improvement -
> sure, it keeps those things in sync, but it also makes the code harder
> to read.  On balance I think it's a negative.
>

I don't think the code is hard to read, but I agree that the macro
name TABLE_COMPOSITE_TYPE_DEPENDENCY isn't conveying the real sense.
But that's not a topic for this thread. I will start a separate a
thread.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yugo Nagata
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] type of release note of PG10
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Dropping partitioned table drops a previously detached partition