| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Boolean partitions syntax |
| Date: | 2018-04-11 01:44:54 |
| Message-ID: | 1594.1523411094@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> At least partition bound *must* be a constant. Any expression
> that can be reduced to a constant at parse time ought to be
> accepted but must not be accepted if not.
My point is that *any* expression can be reduced to a constant,
we just have to do so.
> Maybe we could explicitly control that by having pseudo functions
> like eval().
> ... where sold_date = eval_on_parse('today');
> ... where sold_date = eval_on_exec('today');
This strikes me as far outside the immediate requirements. In fact,
if we had such functions, they'd be irrelevant to this requirement.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2018-04-11 02:17:57 | Re: lazy detoasting |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2018-04-11 01:27:33 | Re: Boolean partitions syntax |