Re: documentation fixes for partition pruning, round three

On 01.06.18 23:33, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>>> - should we find a unified term for "inheritence-based partitioning" and avoid
>>> using the word "partitioning" in that context? For example: "Partitioning
>>> can be implemented using table inheritance[...]". One possible phrase
>>> currently begin used is: "legacy inheritance method".
>>
>> Yeah, maybe it'd be a good time to do that. In particular I wondered
>> whether the section title "Partitioning and Constraint Exclusion" should
>> be changed somehow to note the fact that it's mostly for the legacy
>> method.
>
> I made changes to avoid "partition" (which I think should mean a child of
> relkind='p', and itself of relkind='r') and "partitioned" (meaning relkind='p'
> itself) but left alone most instances of "partitioning".

Committed.

> There's two issues. One is the unfortunately-named, recommended setting of
> constraint_exclusion='partition' :(
>
> And one is this, which I think should be disambiguated from native
> list/range/hash partition bounds:
>
> Use simple equality conditions for list partitioning, or simple range
> tests for range partitioning, as illustrated in the preceding examples.
>
> I'm short on words so maybe someone else can recommend language.

I'm not worried about those.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services