On 2017/09/28 22:29, Jesper Pedersen wrote:
> On 09/28/2017 09:19 AM, Maksim Milyutin wrote:
>>> E.g. "No partition constraint" vs. "Partition constraint:
>>> satisfies_hash_partition(...)".
>>
>> I also noticed ambiguity in printing "No partition constraint" in
>> non-verbose mode and "Partition constraint:..." in verbose one for
>> partition tables regardless of the type of partition.
>> Attached small patch removes any output about partition constraint in
>> non-verbose mode.
>>
>
> Yeah, that could be one way.
>
> It should likely be backported to REL_10_STABLE, so the question is if we
> are too late in the release cycle to change that output.
I think the default partition commit [1] introduced some change around
that code, so the behavior is new in 11dev and I think it needs a fix like
the one that Maksim proposed.
When I check with REL_10_STABLE tip, I find things to be normal:
create table p (a int) partition by list (a);
create table p1 partition of p for values in (1);
\d p1 Table "public.p1"Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------a | integer | | |
Partition of: p FOR VALUES IN (1)
\d+ p1 Table "public.p1"Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage |
Stats
target | Description
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------a | integer |
| | | plain | |
Partition of: p FOR VALUES IN (1)
Partition constraint: ((a IS NOT NULL) AND (a = ANY (ARRAY[1])))
Thanks,
Amit
[1]
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdiff;f=src/bin/psql/describe.c;h=d22ec68431e231d9c781c2256a6030d66e0fd09d;hp=6fb9bdd063583fb8b60ad282aeb5256df67942e4;hb=6f6b99d1335be8ea1b74581fc489a97b109dd08a;hpb=2cf15ec8b1cb29bea149559700566a21a790b6d3
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers