Hi Greg,<br /><br />Thanks for your response.<br /><br />Currently, such records are left in the overflow partition and
itsresponsibility <br />of user to insert them into partitioned-table which will then re-direct those to <br
/>appropriatepartitions.<br /><br />Regards,<br />--<br />Kedar.<br /><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 21,
2009at 5:29 PM, Greg Stark <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:stark@enterprisedb.com">stark@enterprisedb.com</a>></span>wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="im">On Tue,
Apr21, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Kedar Potdar <<a href="mailto:kedar.potdar@gmail.com">kedar.potdar@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br/> > I want to seek general opinion from the community on preferences between<br /> > user-friendly
‘Oracle’syntax, and a more generic syntax that allows ‘gaps’<br /> > in partition ranges?<br /><br /><br
/></div>Whathappens to records in the overflow table when you add a new<br /> partition whose range covers their
values?<br/><br /> --<br /><font color="#888888">greg<br /></font></blockquote></div><br />