Re: Declarative partitioning vs. sql_inheritance

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Ivanov <d(dot)ivanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning vs. sql_inheritance
Date: 2016-12-17 00:39:46
Message-ID: 13737.1481935186@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 12/16/16 11:05 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> If we were going to do anything about this,
>> my vote would be to remove sql_inheritance.

> Go for it.

> Let's also remove the table* syntax then.

Meh --- that might break existing queries, to what purpose?

We certainly shouldn't remove query syntax without a deprecation period.
I'm less concerned about that for GUCs.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-12-17 01:07:44 Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2016-12-17 00:37:53 Re: Proposal for changes to recovery.conf API