Re: dropping partitioned tables without CASCADE

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 2) Add partition to the foo;
>
> create table foo_p1 partition of foo for values in (1, 2, 3) partition by
> list (b);
>
> postgres=# \d foo
> Table "public.foo"
> Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> a | integer | | |
> b | integer | | |
> Partition key: LIST (a)
> Number of partitions: 1 (Use \d+ to list them.)
>
> postgres=# \d+ foo
> Table "public.foo"
> Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default | Storage | Stats target
> | Description
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+--------------+-------------
> a | integer | | | | plain |
> |
> b | integer | | | | plain |
> |
> Partition key: LIST (a)
> Partitions: foo_p1 FOR VALUES IN (1, 2, 3) has partitions
>
> Above verbose output for foo says, foo_p1 "has partitions". But if I do
>
> postgres=# \d foo_p1
> Table "public.foo_p1"
> Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> a | integer | | |
> b | integer | | |
> Partition of: foo FOR VALUES IN (1, 2, 3)
> Partition key: LIST (b)
> Number of partitions: 0
>
> it tell "Number of partitions: 0".
>
> I feel like information is conflicting with each other. AFAIU, idea about
> adding
> "has partitions" was to let know that it's a partitioned table. So can you
> directly
> add the "is partitioned" in place of "has partitions"?
>
> Did those change in the attached patch and update regression expected
> output.
>

Looks better.

> Also run pgindent on the patch.
>

Thanks for the changes. The patch looks good to me.

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company