Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ashutosh Bapat
Тема Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning
Дата
Msg-id CAFjFpRd9qvfdu4H8J8tnTD6Hhcg0V2Ct2cumHMk-M6Ex_fEa5Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 5/15/17 23:45, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> +1. We should throw an error and add a line in documentation that
>> collation should not be specified for hash partitioned table.
>
> Why is it even allowed in the parser then?

That grammar is common to all the partitioning strategies. It looks
like it's easy to handle collation for hash partitions in
transformation than in grammar. But, if we could handle it in grammar,
I don't have any objection to it.

-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] If subscription to foreign table valid ?
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [doc fix] PG10: wroing description onconnect_timeout when multiple hosts are specified