|From:||Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>|
|To:||Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 6 March 2017 at 05:29, Ashutosh Bapat
>> <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Just to confirm, you want the output to look like this
>>>>> \d+ t1
>>>>> Table "public.t1"
>>>>> Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats
>>>>> target | Description
>>>>> a | integer | | not null | | plain | |
>>>>> Partition key: RANGE (a)
>>>>> Partitions: t1p1 FOR VALUES FROM (0) TO (100), HAS PARTITIONS
>>>>> t1p2 FOR VALUES FROM (100) TO (200)
>>>> lowercase please
>>> Except for HAS PARTITIONS, everything is part of today's output. Given
>>> the current output, HAS PARTITIONS should be in upper case.
>> "has partitions" is not part of the DDL, whereas "FOR VALUES FROM (0)
>> TO (100)" is. So ISTM sensible to differentiate between DDL and
>> non-ddl using upper and lower case.
> Make sense. Will try to cook up a patch soon.
here's the patch. I have added a testcase in insert.sql to test \d+
output for a partitioned table which has partitions which are further
partitioned and also some partitions which are not partitioned
themselves. I have also refactored a statement few lines above,
replacing an if condition with ? : operator similar to code few lines
The Postgres Database Company
|Next Message||vinayak||2017-03-06 09:20:04||Re: ANALYZE command progress checker|
|Previous Message||Rushabh Lathia||2017-03-06 09:16:59||Re: Print correct startup cost for the group aggregate.|