On 2018-11-12 17:33, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> One of the guiding principles that I think we should hold for
>> partitioning is that operating directly into the partition should be
>> seen as only an optimization compared to inserting into the parent table
>> -- thus it should not behave differently. Applying different default
>> values depending on where you're inserting into goes counter to that
>> principle.
>
> I'm not entirely convinced that I buy that argument, especially not in
> a case like this where it introduces logical inconsistencies where there
> otherwise wouldn't be any.
>
I think I missed something, what are the *introduced* logical problems?
Apart from implementation issues the only logical problems I see are if
you allow to change defaults of the partition key columns, and these are
problematic (nonsensical really) in either case.
Regards,
Jürgen
