Re: documentation fixes for partition pruning, round two

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: documentation fixes for partition pruning, round two
Date: 2018-06-01 19:00:10
Message-ID: 20180601190010.iqux2pa2jpw2cxl2@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-May-23, Justin Pryzby wrote:

> There's two other, wider changes to consider:
>
> - should "5.10.4. Partition Pruning" be moved after "5.10.2. Declarative
> Partitioning", rather than after "5.10.3. Implementation Using Inheritance" ?

I considered that when reorganizing this section, but it seemed more
sensible to me to keep both pruning techniques together rather than put
each one immediately below its partitioning technique. Maybe I'm wrong
in that.

> - should we find a unified term for "inheritence-based partitioning" and avoid
> using the word "partitioning" in that context? For example: "Partitioning
> can be implemented using table inheritance[...]". One possible phrase
> currently begin used is: "legacy inheritance method".

Yeah, maybe it'd be a good time to do that. In particular I wondered
whether the section title "Partitioning and Constraint Exclusion" should
be changed somehow to note the fact that it's mostly for the legacy
method.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manuel Kniep 2018-06-01 19:11:10 Re: PATCH pass PGOPTIONS to pg_regress
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-06-01 18:57:22 Re: documentation fixes for partition pruning, round two