| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(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: | 2017-05-17 03:34:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAFjFpRd9qvfdu4H8J8tnTD6Hhcg0V2Ct2cumHMk-M6Ex_fEa5Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 5/15/17 23:45, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> +1. We should throw an error and add a line in documentation that
>> collation should not be specified for hash partitioned table.
>
> Why is it even allowed in the parser then?
That grammar is common to all the partitioning strategies. It looks
like it's easy to handle collation for hash partitions in
transformation than in grammar. But, if we could handle it in grammar,
I don't have any objection to it.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-05-17 03:58:42 | Re: Re: [doc fix] PG10: wroing description on connect_timeout when multiple hosts are specified |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-05-17 02:59:18 | Re: If subscription to foreign table valid ? |