Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14759: insert into foreign data partitions fail - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14759: insert into foreign data partitions fail
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwZNxLfpsUPMs82m+t-Z3Oa45jVREjLqima5GOx3DK7NrQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14759: insert into foreign data partitions fail  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #14759: insert into foreign data partitions fail  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 5:42 PM, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

On a second thought though, I think we should list the foreign table
partitions' limitations in only one place, that is, the CREATE FOREIGN
TABLE reference page.  Listing them under 5.10.2.3. seems a bit off to me,
because other limitations listed there are those of the new partitioned
table objects, such as lack of global index constraints, etc.  Lack of
tuple-routing to foreign partitions does not seem to me of the similar
nature.  Also, the same text is no longer repeated in 3 different places.

Thoughts on the updated patch?

Overall, works for me.

grammar (add a couple of commas for flow) and style (dropping the first "the")

current: "(both the user-defined constraints such as <literal>CHECK</> or <literal>NOT NULL</> clauses and the partition constraint)"
proposed: "(both user-defined constraints, such as <literal>CHECK</> or <literal>NOT NULL</> clauses, and the partition constraint)"

Thanks!

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PL_stashcache, or, what's our minimum Perl version?
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Hash take II