Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dmitry Koval
Subject Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands
Date
Msg-id e711faa8-826d-434d-b197-ab51da518fe7@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands
List pgsql-hackers
Hi!

Attached is a patch with corrections based on comments in previous 
letters (I think these corrections are not final).
I'll be very grateful for feedbacks and bug reports.

11.04.2024 20:00, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
 > may be an attempt to merge into implicit
 > pg_temp should fail just like CREATE TABLE ... PARTITION OF ... does?

Corrected. Result is:

\d+ s1.*
Table "s1.tp0"
...
Table "s1.tp1"
...
\d+ tp*
Did not find any relation named "tp*".


12.04.2024 4:53, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
 > I think we shouldn't unconditionally copy schema name and
 > relpersistence from the parent table. Instead we should throw the
 > error on a mismatch like CREATE TABLE ... PARTITION OF ... does.
12.04.2024 5:20, Robert Haas wrote:
 > We definitely shouldn't copy the schema name from the parent table.

Fixed.

12.04.2024 5:20, Robert Haas wrote:
 > One of the things I dislike about this type of feature -- not this
 > implementation specifically, but just this kind of idea in general --
 > is that the syntax mentions a whole bunch of tables but in a way where
 > you can't set their properties. Persistence, reloptions, whatever.

In next releases I want to allow specifying options (probably, first of 
all, specifying tablespace of the partitions).
But before that, I would like to get a users reaction - what options 
they really need?

-- 
With best regards,
Dmitry Koval

Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: Add notes to pg_combinebackup docs
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Issue with the PRNG used by Postgres