Re: Documentation correction suggestion for primary key hashing on partitioned tables

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: mark(at)markandruth(dot)co(dot)uk, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Documentation correction suggestion for primary key hashing on partitioned tables
Date: 2025-04-24 20:04:57
Message-ID: b326de4ee8fb39593287c7f88c9fa9034e5b2feb.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

On Thu, 2025-04-24 at 09:48 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-partitioning.html / 5.12.2.3.
> Limitations says:
>
> > To create a unique or primary key constraint on a partitioned table, the
> partition keys must not include any expressions or function calls and the
> constraint's columns must include all of the partition key columns. This
> limitation exists because the individual indexes making up the constraint
> can only directly enforce uniqueness within their own partitions; therefore,
> the partition structure itself must guarantee that there are not duplicates
> in different partitions.
>
> This seems to imply that if I have a table of primary key (a, b, c) in
> b-tree index, then a partition-by-hash method would require this full set of
> columns to be used in order for the constraints to be enforcable. However
> logically this should not be the case - only a hash of a prefix of the
> primary key - eg (a) or (a, b) should be needed to target the same table
> each time and hence get the constraint enforced. Testing this in postgres 16
> seems to show that it does work like this.

From the above:

To create a unique or primary key constraint on a partitioned table,
[...] the constraint's columns must include all of the partition key columns.

You seem to read it the other way around. Your example confirms what the
documentation says.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2025-04-25 06:02:09 Re: Remove unnecessary secondary index terms for replication settings
Previous Message Robert Treat 2025-04-24 15:13:24 Re: generated constraint name