Horton

Re: Adding support for Default partition in partitioning

Sven R. Kunze <srkunze@mail.de>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com>, amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>, Keith Fiske <keith@omniti.com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-05-10T20:21:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 10.05.2017 17:59, Robert Haas wrote:
> Well, I don't think it would be a HUGE problem, but I think the fact
> that Amit chose to implement this with syntax similar to that of
> Oracle is probably not a coincidence, but rather a goal, and I think
> the readability problem that you're worrying about is really pretty
> minor.  I think most people aren't going to subpartition their default
> partition, and I think those who do will probably find the syntax
> clear enough anyway.

I agree here.

> Optional keywords may not be the root of ALL evil, but they're pretty
> evil.  See my posting earlier on this same thread on this topic:
>
> http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoZGHgd3vKZvyQ1Qx3e0L3n=voxY57mz9TTncVET-aLK2A@mail.gmail.com
>
> The issues here are more or less the same.

Ah, I see. I didn't draw the conclusion from the optionality of a 
keyword the other day but after re-reading your post, it's exactly the 
same issue.
Let's avoid optional keywords!

Sven

Commits

  1. Allow a partitioned table to have a default partition.

  2. Adjust min/max values when changing sequence type

  3. BRIN auto-summarization