Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take

On 2017/01/19 14:15, Amit Langote wrote:
> So, here are all the patches I posted to date (and one new at the bottom)
> for reported and unreported bugs, excluding the one involving
> BulkInsertState for which you replied in a new thread.
> 
> I'll describe the attached patches in brief:

Sorry, I forgot to mention that I have skipped the patch I proposed to
modify the committed approach [1] to get the correct tuple to show in the
constraint violation messages.  It might be better to continue that
discussion at [2].

And because I skipped that patch, I should have removed the related logic
in ExecWithCheckOptions() that I added in one of the later patches (patch
0004), which I forgot to do.  So, here are all the patches again with the
correct 0004 this time.  Sigh.

Thanks,
Amit

[1]
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=f1b4c771ea74f42447dccaed42ffcdcccf3aa694

[2]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoZjGzSM5WwnyapFaw3GxnDLWh7pm8Xiz8_QWQnUQy%3DSCA%40mail.gmail.com

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers