Re: Partitions: \d vs \d+

Hi!

On 28.09.2017 16:02, Jesper Pedersen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Using hash partitions I noticed that \d gives
>
> D=# \d T_p63
>                Table "public.T_p63"
>     Column     |     Type      | Collation | Nullable | Default
> ---------------+---------------+-----------+----------+---------
>
> <remove>
>
> Partition of: T FOR VALUES WITH (modulus 64, remainder 63)
> No partition constraint
> Indexes:
>     "T_p63" btree (X, Y)
>
> where as \d+ gives
>
> D=# \d+ T_p63
>                Table "public.T_p63"
>     Column     |     Type      | Collation | Nullable | Default |
> Storage  | Stats target | Description
> ---------------+---------------+-----------+----------+---------+----------+--------------+-------------
>
>
> <remove>
>
> Partition of: T FOR VALUES WITH (modulus 64, remainder 63)
> Partition constraint: satisfies_hash_partition(64, 63,
> hashint4extended(X, '8816678312871386367'::bigint))
> Indexes:
>     "T_p63" btree (X, Y)
>
> 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.

--
Regards,
Maksim Milyutin