Re: Documentation and code don't agree about partitioned table UPDATEs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Documentation and code don't agree about partitioned table UPDATEs
Date
Msg-id CAKJS1f8LODhDYO3M89ZUqd86iWy16VTkEW-fCabCKUK2GBH47g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Documentation and code don't agree about partitioned table UPDATEs  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Documentation and code don't agree about partitioned table UPDATEs
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 at 16:20, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that the docs need to be updated and this patch should be
> backpatched as well.  However, I think the older wording was more
> descriptive and clear, so I have modified your patch a bit to retain
> part of old wording, see the result as attached.

I have to admit, I was quite fond of the original text, at least when
it was true.  Your alteration of it seems pretty good to me too.


-- 
 David Rowley                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Gierth
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix optimization of foreign-key on update actions
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Tighten up a few overly lax regexes in pg_dump's tap tests