| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Boolean partitions syntax |
| Date: | 2018-02-02 22:17:30 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZCinMWJ=UJ0W48rF02pWZ0ihrjkba=iiZAM+LjBC1sUg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:40 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> There might be other options, but one way to solve this would be to
> treat partition bounds as a general expression in the grammar and then
> check in post-parse analysis that it's a constant.
Yeah -- isn't the usual way of handling this to run the user's input
through eval_const_expressions and see if the result is constant?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-02-02 22:34:46 | Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-02-02 22:15:01 | Draft release notes for 10.2 et al |