| From: | Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Maxim Orlov <m(dot)orlov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Automatic HASH and LIST partition creation |
| Date: | 2020-12-23 10:59:51 |
| Message-ID: | CALT9ZEF_aMgYoEg9JFYm9GUDwaa014wu7rtS_To8f82zt_rHaw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
>
> > BTW could you tell me a couple of words about pros and cons of c-code
> > syntax parsing comparing to parsing using gram.y trees?
>
> I'd rather use an automatic tool (lexer/parser) if possible instead of
> doing it by hand if I can. If you want a really nice syntax with clever
> tricks, then you may need to switch to manual though, but pg/sql is not in
> that class.
>
> > I think both are possible but my predisposition was that we'd better use
> > the later if possible.
>
> I agree.
>
Thank you!
Fabien, do you consider it possible to change the syntax of declarative
partitioning too? It is problematic as it is already committed but also is
very tempting to have the same type of syntax both in automatic
partitioning and in manual (PARTITION OF...)
--
Best regards,
Pavel Borisov
Postgres Professional: http://postgrespro.com <http://www.postgrespro.com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-12-23 12:11:04 | Re: Confused about stream replication protocol documentation |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-12-23 10:59:03 | Re: Logical decoding without slots: decoding in lockstep with recovery |