Re: Boolean partitions syntax

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: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Boolean partitions syntax
Date: 2017-12-12 09:12:50
Message-ID: CAFjFpRfw7KxyPPk4WQd4cOeHK-JFweUwCRaBEErdkCLB1L92Fw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 7:19 AM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Horiguchi-san pointed out [1] on a nearby thread that the partitioning
> syntax (the FOR VALUES clause) doesn't accept true and false as valid
> partition bound datums, which seems to me like an oversight. Attached a
> patch to fix that.
>
> create table bools (a bool) partition by list (a);
>
> Before patch:
>
> create table bools_t partition of bools for values in (true);
> ERROR: syntax error at or near "true"
> LINE 1: ...reate table bools_t partition of bools for values in (true);
>
> After:
>
> create table bools_t partition of bools for values in (true);
> CREATE TABLE
> \d bools_t
> Table "public.bools_t"
> Column | Type | Collation | Nullable | Default
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> a | boolean | | |
> Partition of: bools FOR VALUES IN (true)
>
> Thanks,
> Amit
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20171128.203915.26713586.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp

May be you should use opt_boolean_or_string instead of TRUE_P and
FALSE_P. It also supports ON and OFF, which will be bonus.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-12-12 09:13:36 Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Previous Message Maksim Milyutin 2017-12-12 08:57:36 Re: [HACKERS] Add support for tuple routing to foreign partitions