Re: no default hash partition
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>,
Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-08-07T21:22:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 2019-Aug-07, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hm, that's rather confusingly worded IMO. Is the antecedent of "this >> option" just DEFAULT, or does it mean that you can't use FOR VALUES, >> or perchance it means that you can't use a PARTITION OF clause >> at all? > Uh, you're right, I hadn't noticed that. Not my text. I think this can > be fixed easily as in the attached. There are other options, but I like > this one the best. OK, but maybe also s/created as a default partition/created as the default partition/ ? Writing "a" carries the pretty clear implication that there can be more than one, and contradicting that a sentence later doesn't improve it. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Clarify the default partition's role
- 956451e8bc9f 13.0 landed
- edc793d374af 12.0 landed
- bf6455d4c557 11.6 landed
-
Add comment on no default partition with hash partitioning
- 12afc7145c03 13.0 landed