| From: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Documentation improvements for partitioning |
| Date: | 2017-02-17 05:48:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAFjFpRf6dDPhKhevdXNSfN3eXDaC2Ec5Yy5HvLJxkTy_-1AeeQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
In the documentation of ALTER TABLE ... ATTACH PARTITION its implicit
that partition name specified should be the name of the existing table
being attached. Same is the case with DETACH PARTITION where its
implicit that the detached partition becomes a stand-alone table with
same name as the partition being detached. I think this needs to be
more explicit. PFA patch on those lines.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-02-17 05:50:45 | Re: Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2017-02-17 05:27:40 | Re: Partitioning vs ON CONFLICT |