Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use MINVALUE/MAXVALUE instead of UNBOUNDED for range partition b
Amit Langote <langote_amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-09-13T09:05:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- 0001-Canonicalize-catalog-representation-of-range-partiti.patch (text/plain) patch 0001
Hi Dean, On 2017/09/13 17:51, Dean Rasheed wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: >>> Did anything happen on this, or did we just forget it completely? >> >> I forgot it. :-( >> >> I really think we should fix this. > > Ah, sorry. This was for me to follow up, and I dropped the ball. > > Here's a patch restoring the original error checks (actually not the > same coding as used in previous versions of the patch, because that > would have allowed a MINVALUE after a MAXVALUE and vice versa). > > A drawback to doing this is that we lose compatibility with syntaxes > supported by other databases, which was part of the reason for > choosing the terms MINVALUE and MAXVALUE in the first place. > > So thinking about this afresh, my preference would actually be to just > canonicalise the values stored rather than erroring out. > > Thoughts? Coincidentally, I just wrote the patch for canonicalizing stored values, instead of erroring out. Please see attached if that's what you were thinking too. Thanks, Amit
Commits
-
After a MINVALUE/MAXVALUE bound, allow only more of the same.
- e8b65986ba0d 10.0 landed
- 9361f6f54e3f 11.0 landed
-
Use MINVALUE/MAXVALUE instead of UNBOUNDED for range partition bounds.
- d363d42bb9a4 10.0 cited