| From: | amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [POC] hash partitioning |
| Date: | 2017-05-15 10:57:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAAJ_b96r0GwTG4sb42BdaXVhn2QZTJ1avQO8fU5i70ukSyqeEQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> Hash partitioning will partition the data based on the hash value of the
>> partition key. Does that require collation? Should we throw an error/warning if
>> collation is specified in PARTITION BY clause?
>
> Collation is only relevant for ordering, not equality. Since hash
> opclasses provide only equality, not ordering, it's not relevant here.
> I'm not sure whether we should error out if it's specified or just
> silently ignore it. Maybe an ERROR is a good idea? But not sure.
>
IMHO, we could simply have a WARNING, and ignore collation, thoughts?
Updated patches attached.
Regards,
Amul
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Cleanup_v2.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.4 KB |
| 0002-hash-partitioning_another_design-v5.patch | application/octet-stream | 77.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-05-15 11:00:20 | Re: Patch to fix documentation about AFTER triggers |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-05-15 10:30:13 | Re: Server Crashes if try to provide slot_name='none' at the time of creating subscription. |