| From: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dmitry Koval <d(dot)koval(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands |
| Date: | 2026-06-26 19:50:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAPpHfdsao-VXZYN8-vRm543EFUE7=4tq+hcTh5iEc6ikqWq_cQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 6:20 PM Dmitry Koval <d(dot)koval(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> If we exclude case with DEFAULT partition, MERGE PARTITIONS command was
> intended to be used when an incorrect table partitioning was chosen.
> For example, a table was initially partitioned by month, but later we
> needed to change table partitioning by quarter. In this case, MERGE
> PARTITIONS command should merge several adjacent partitions into one.
> Current checks are made for this case.
>
> >- If there's *no* default partition, then I think the check should be
> >relaxed; it's sufficient to verify that the bounds of the merged
> >partition do not overlap with any partition which is not being merged;
>
> It's probably possible to do this. But in this case, the command will
> not exactly be "MERGE PARTITIONS" ("MERGE PARTITIONS & EXPAND"?).
+1,
We can implement a support for this for 20. For 19, I propose to
state the restriction more explicit in the docs. See the attached
patch.
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-doc-clarify-MERGE-PARTITIONS-adjacency-requiremen.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous Message | Ian Lawrence Barwick | 2026-06-26 19:46:26 | Re: DOCS - "Get Object DDL Functions" table improvements |