Re: Declarative partitioning - another take

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar(dot)raghuwanshi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning - another take
Date: 2017-04-26 16:52:23
Message-ID: CA+TgmobfABZ8xEs9pmHxJm46YoBJdoBbDFzQBRFBAyrqHaBUhQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> FWIW, I too prefer the latter, that is, fire only the parent's triggers.
> In that case, applying only the patch 0001 will do.

Do we need to update the documentation?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2017-04-26 16:56:30 Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2017-04-26 16:43:56 Fix a typo in worker.c