Re: Partitioned tables and [un]loggedness

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Partitioned tables and [un]loggedness
Date: 2025-06-05 00:23:42
Message-ID: aEDjjpritZuv3h2J@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 11:15:29AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I see no benefit in recommending things that are guaranteed to error. In
> commit 5c1ce1b, we removed tab completion for CREATE UNLOGGED MATERIALIZED
> VIEW even though it is supported by the grammar. The partitioned table
> case sounds like roughly the same situation.

Agreed to not suggest the PARTITION BY clause in the tab completion as
it is not supported by the backend for unlogged tables.
tab-complete.in.c has some handling for CREATE UNLOGGED TABLE around
line 3667, so we could just have an extra case for it, like in the
attached patch. A split already exists for temporary tables to handle
the ON COMMIT clause after the attribute list.

Thoughts?
--
Michael

Attachment Content-Type Size
psql-tab-unlogged.patch text/x-diff 1.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Renan Alves Fonseca 2025-06-05 00:33:09 Re: PoC: Compute a histogram of prune_xid to support autovacuum improvements
Previous Message Peter Smith 2025-06-05 00:16:39 Re: [WIP]Vertical Clustered Index (columnar store extension) - take2