Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees
Date: 2018-07-02 22:16:50
Message-ID: 20180702221650.GA2159@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 02:07:37PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I'd rather keep an elog(ERROR) than completely remove the check.

+1.

> Also, for the record, I think the subject line of Michael's commit
> message was pretty unclear about what it was actually doing.

How would you formulate it? Perhaps the error message did not emphasize
enough on the fast that it actually blocked a behavior, say "Block mix
of temporary and permanent relations in partition trees" or such?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-07-03 00:55:58 Re: pgsql: Add wait event for fsync of WAL segments
Previous Message Robert Haas 2018-07-02 18:07:37 Re: pgsql: Clarify use of temporary tables within partition trees

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nico Williams 2018-07-02 22:16:52 Re: Threat models for DB cryptography (Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key) Management Service (KMS)
Previous Message Nico Williams 2018-07-02 22:14:07 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] WIP Add ALWAYS DEFERRED option for constraints