Re: Declarative partitioning - another take

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Stephen Frost
Тема Re: Declarative partitioning - another take
Дата
Msg-id 20161208133504.GA23417@tamriel.snowman.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Declarative partitioning - another take  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Amit,

* Amit Langote (Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> Hmm, I had mixed feeling about what to do about that as well.  So now, we
> have the description of various new features buried into VI. Reference
> section of the documentation, which is simply meant as a command
> reference.  I agree that the new partitioning warrants more expansion in
> the DDL partitioning chapter.  Will see how that could be done.

Definitely.

> > * The fact that there's no implementation of row movement should be
> > documented as a limitation.  We should also look at removing that
> > limitation.
>
> Yes, something to improve.  By the way, since we currently mention INSERT
> tuple-routing directly in the description of the partitioned tables in the
> CREATE TABLE command reference, is that also the place to list this
> particular limitation?  Or is UPDATE command reference rather the correct
> place?

Both.

Thanks!

Stephen

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Back-patch use of unnamed POSIX semaphores for Linux?
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Back-patch use of unnamed POSIX semaphores for Linux?